Poor Students, or Poor instructors?

[Lost Yooper]

I agree that recreational instructors are not the end all, know all of anything. All they know is what "PADI" tells them unless they go out on their own learn more on their own. It drives me crazy to see a recreational instructor getting special treatment or god-like status on a charter boat. They'll brag about their 1000 dives or whatever, but take a step back when I ask them how many of those were simple training dives.
A lot of instructors today spend more time signing their name to certs than actually making "real" dives. I'm not saying this is a bad thing. They may be good at what is expected of them, but the title of PADI (or NAUI, SSI, or any other recreational agency) instructor or dive master doesn't carry much, if any, weight with me.

Technical divers are well known for their egos, but I'd say they are on par with most of the instructors and even dive master I've seen. Of course, the differences in skills and knowledge can be significant.

Mike

 

[The Chairman]

I don't remember ANYONE saying its not your right to say anything you want to say when you want to say it. I know that -I-did not say that at all. I did say how -I- would have handled the situation. I like to find out WHY mistakes are made and then work them out. I do not want anymore harm done to the reefs than you do. However, there is a distinct possibility that this could cause them to "lash out" at the public harangue and trash the reefs even more. I saw this in the Bahamas once where a diver approached a local Dive master about hitting the reef. BOY did that cause a row.

You see, intent is very important to me. It will tell me if this is a person worth wasting my breath over, or if I need to call authorities. As eggregious as trashing a reef is (and there -IS- simply no excuse) I would still rather use reason than just trying to shame him... but that's me. I try to work things out all the time. I think positive constructive criticism can bring about positive constructive results. I also feel that negative destructive criticism will bring about negative destructive results. Thats my philosophy. As a caveat, I was not even there, and you may have determined all of this already. I can't ascertain that, but you can. Sometimes you just HAVE to use the stick and forgo the carrot.

 

[Ferrara]

VTWarrenG,

The Padi quizes and exams require an initial score of 75% to pass. Prior to completion the student must demonstrate 100% mastery. This can be by instructor dicussion. PADI standards require the student to demonstrate mastery at every stage of training. Unfortunately many instructors don't require the student to demonstrate mastery. That is if the instructor can tell the difference.

lost yooper,
The GUE is trying to raise the mark in dive training. Others try to raise the mark too. All good instructors are appalled at much of what goes on in dive training today! The GUE are not the only ones. No agency condones poor training. There is nothing in the standards to prevent an instructor from providing quality training. People want fast and cheap. Fast and cheap has financial rewards, therefore it is available. I am a PADI and IANTD instructor. I do not issue a card until a student demonstrates mastery of the material. I do not accept a student if they do not posses the requisit skill and attitude to begin a class. Our trend has been to add pool time and raise prices. I will choose to close my shop before I conduct the kind of training so popular today.

Anything that has a market will be sold. There is a giant market for anything that looks like a bargain.

 

[Se7en]

Originally posted by NetDoc

This is why I like to see them do AOW right away. It gives them more time with their instructor and gives the instructor a little more jingle to make their time worthwhile. A good AOW course will identify "missed" skills and take corrective action. Will all AOW students say they know what a 3 minute safety stop is? Possibly not, but I bet the percentage improves with the extra training.

NetDoc
I've got to query the logic here.
A PADI OW diver is supposed to be trained to dive to 18m in easy conditions. A AOW diver is 'trained' to dive to 30m at night in current... after doing 4 more dives than on the OW course.

Either way, they are a rank beginner, with few real clues as to diving.

I'd suggest that it's better to have a rank beginner believing that they should only dive to 18m in good conditions, than it is to have that same rank beginner believing they are 'certified' (ie trained and safe) to do more advanced diving.

Why not emphasise to students that they only have the ability and training to do easy dives to start with - and suggest that they come back for the AOW course when they start feeling that their diving is limited by the 18m limit?

Surely the result would be that;
the xx% of divers who don't do any significant diving after their course do there one or three dives in easy conditions then give up;
The next xx% of divers do at least enough diving to work out how the gear works and get comfortable in water, then come back for AOW;
And the rest manage to find experienced buddies to dive with that enable them to get experience safely, and then get forced into a AOW course to pay for a semi useless instructor to take them on dives they have done a dozen times before...

The ridiculous extention of your logic is a diver than I am aquainted with. He was encouraged by his instructor to continue doing courses consecutively after OW. He is now a PADI "Master Diver" with a total of 27 dives (including pool training) - with all but 6 of those dives occuring under the same pier in a sheltered bay, with an instructor and DM in attendance. do you think the instructor has now picked up on all his 'missed skills' and he is a diver we should all aspire to be?



Mike

 

[neil]

Yooper,
I can't agree with you more about having more dives required for certs. I find that students who do 6 dives with me are MUCH better than those who do 4 (PADI) or 5 (NAUI). Even though neither agency requires it, I am starting to take the majority of divers on 6 dives and am very happy with the results. Technically I can't require it of the PADI students, but they all agree to it, so far.
As far as emphasizing the more important skills, you have to remember that the OW course is an overview of all skills, and time is not unlimited. I agree that those skills ARE the most important, but we have to include the others too. It IS about money. It's about giving the most and best instruction you can in the time alotted. I do my best to rush through the lesser skills to spend time on buoyancy, etc, but you do get students stuck on supposedly "easy" skills, and that slows you down. It's also unfortunate that the easy cheap course is what people expect. That's the industry's fault (read: "PADI"). I bet GUE isn't giving courses away for $99!

Neil

 

[Ferrara]

The 4 dive requirement is a minimum. Completion should be based on mastery. If a student has not mastered the material the instructor must, per standards, require more dives. PADI has made provision for what they call excursion dives. The purpose is to provide the opportunity for and encourage more dives with the instructor.

As for spending more time on important skills; PADI recommends that each confined-water session include time for fun and practice. Repetition and practice should be par for the course.

Shops and instructors cut dive time short because they don’t charge enough not because of the agency. Students are not receiving the class the agencies intended. PADI does not give classes away for $99, shops and instructors do that.

The purpose of the AOW is not to mislead divers to believe they are more qualified than they are but to provide additional supervised experience. Better they go to 60+ feet with me on their 5th dive than to follow some resort DM into a wreck at 100 feet on their 5th dive (happens all the time). And this does lead the diver to believe they are more capable than they are. An AOW navigation, search, deep or night dive can be a real eye opener. IT can show a new diver just how much there is to learn. I have seen divers get OW and then just dive. They spend their dive career looking for the boat and stirring up the bottom. They follow other people who are looking for the boat and stirring up the bottom and think that’s the way it’s done. It does no good to practice doing it wrong.

 

[neil]

Ferrara,
Correct on all points. However, I think PADI is a bit guilty of promoting the idea that scuba is very easy and anyone can do it TODAY. DIVE TODAY, that't the motto.

The best thing you've said is that we don't charge enough for the classes, and that shops are not giving the classes the agencies intended. That is SO to the point. Given some decent pay, instructors could spend the time and teach better courses. Makes sense, but it won't be that easy to change years of loss-leader courses and underpaid instructors.

Neil

 

[DameDykker]

Given that local conditions are always just that - local. I think that the OW or equivalent should be condition limited. The purpose is that the student must not think that an easy no-nonscens dive in 3 m visability, 10 deg. C is the same as an easy no-nonscens dive in 30 m visability, 25 deg. C. There are dangers both ways.

Off course we mostly see people with a warm water C-cart that think that they can dive in Scandinavia without further training.

A regional C-cart would also make it possible to include night dives, drift dives and/or other local requirement. But that is exsactly wath NACE do as far as I know.

Pia

 

[padiscubapro]

Before I post my opinion on this subject, let me give you some background about me so you know where you are coming from.
I started teaching as a PADI instructor 11 years ago.. Started teaching tech diving with TDI and later ANDI.. I also have some good friends that are way up the IANTD chain...

Someone commented about instructors lasting 3 years, thats a pretty valid point there aren't many experienced instructors that are still active, most get burnt out.
The industry needs to make new instructors on a regular basis, from personal observation the quality of instructors has dropped measurable and too many people are becoming instructors, and poor ones at that.
Instructors that teach tech programs aren't necessarily better instructors, some people get those ratings too easily in ideal conditions.. I've had some "tech" instructors dive with me off NY that some of my AOW students do a better job..
Here is my opinion on tech agencies..

GUE - most of the traning seems to be of good quality (although I know at least 1 GUE instructor I wouldn't even think of diving with) , but leaves little room for diver input. Stresses buddy system.. I don't know enough about instructor programs to comment.

TDI programs vary tremendously from excellent to poor (all dependent on instructor and how much he/she can add to the student manuals)..
To get a TDI cert you don't actually have to run a TDI program, as long as you use the TDI materials and follow TDI standards where they Differ from the class you teach.. TDI recognizes IANTD and ANDI programs as valid not GUE.
Too many instructors crossed over too easily.. too many instructor trainers, too easy to become one. Academic materials are improving..

IANTD older than TDI, again programs vary greatly, materials don't seem to pay much atention to team planning. To many instructor trainers. Student materials better than TDI but considerably weaker than ANDI.
ANDI - one of the first tech training agencies, very high instructor and academic standards.. All classes are long, extensive buddy and team planning and the best student manuals I have seen content wise (padi manuals/videos still LOOK the best). Doesn't take any nonsense from instructors, you cut corners you are out.. ALL instructors go through the same training, all students in all tech classes get questioneers from HQ to check on class content. NO administrative crossovers.. The potential instructor must sit through all the classes and dives.. Many of the tech diving industry leaders had ANDI training.. Only about 50 current ITs, a little over 100 in its history (a very difficult rating to obtain).

LY can you add anything about GUE but please leave out the political stuff

 

[The Chairman]

PADI nor I can be held accountable for such an instructor. The AOW course does not make you a deep diver... thats why they have a deep diver specialty. PADI is pretty explicit about this. The deep, night and navigational dive done in AOW, are for expanding the student's awareness of how much they DON'T know... sort of a taste, if you will. It is STILL an open water cert... although and "advanced one". BTW, some of the specialties are niggling and some are good. But, if done right, with low ratios, the AOW certification CAN be a win/win situation.

On one hand people complain how cheap and quick PADI is, on the other they chastise it for being money hungry with all of the extra certs. They do work together, and I think they work reasonably well. It's a divide and conquer mentality.

BTW, an instructor that teaches his students in the manner you speak is using his OWN ridiculous logic. My ridiculous logic has students being taught in a responsible manner, and actually mastering skills as they are needed.