Rumor control - DM logged dive requirements?

[DevonDiver]

To put things in perspective....

The average dive professional would easily exceed 20 dives in a week. (sometimes double this number).

Is one week's diving experience sufficient to go from zero to entry onto a professional level course?

The minimum end number of dives from the DM course is 60.

Should someone be certified as a working professional - responsible for the lives of others - with only 2-3 weeks of working experience?

And I absolutely agree that some people take courses one after the other and that 20 dives to be a dive master is not much,

I would go further than that... I would say that 20 dives to be a dive master is not enough. especially when 4 of those dives are spent flailing around on an OW course, 5 of them are spent glassy eyed on an AOW and another 4 of them are shallow 'scenario' dives on a rescue course.

I don't think that training dives should be counted towards the pre-requiste...and even then, 20 dives is not enough.

however that is the min to take the course and I think you still need 50 to complete it but I do not know how that works.

It's 60 dives. Which allows 40 dives minimum on the course. Of these, a great majority will be spent hanging around observing an instructor teaching...often in shallow water, for short duration. Very little diving experience is gained on these training dives.

either way if 20 is the min to take the course then the course should teach you everything you need to know everything you need to do to be a beginning DM. not an expert DM ready for instructor but a beginning DM and if the course is not doing that then it should be revised.

The course should teach you everything you need to know.... but that is based on the assumption that you are a competant, experienced and capable independant diver when you enroll on the course.

If you are below that expectation at the start of the course, then it is difficult to make the necessary progression within the limitations of the course itself.

Experience is what you get when you have no idea what you are doing. Training is to prevent experience from happening. ( I know I destroyed the quote ).
If by experience you mean the Oh **** moments, then you may have 1000 dives before you have a sufficient number of those moments to be qualified to do anything.

As I posted before... I see experience as the benefit recieved from having applied the knowledge you are given in training.

I would support stronger course standards for passing before I would support higher meaningless prerequisites.

If candidates were of a higher standard when enrolling on the course, there would be no need to amend the course itself.

As I posted before...when the DM course fails to create sufficiently high calibre divemasters, it is because the focus of the course has been diluted by the additional burden of having to get inexperienced divers up to the expected level of capability...so that higher level skills can then be processes and ingrained.

As an instructor...I want to teach DM candidates how to become dive professionals.... not waste my time resolving their basic dive skills and inexperience.

People have to learn to walk, before they can run. The DM course is a 'marathon'... so shuffling pedestrians should not enroll on it.

it should never be said that a fully trained DM is not competent to do his job.

But it is.....often. Hence the reason that so many dive instructors would lobby for stricter pre-requisites.

 

[SailNaked]

I give. we both agree that the goal is to produce competent DMs. I have never logged a training dive, and I would not sign up for the course if I did not think I was ready, I thought I was ready after 100 ocean dives. but by your math that is only 5 weeks of diving, it took me 2 years. and maybe you would say I am still not ready.
my only real point is that the number of dives is arbitrary and not representative of the skills needed before the class or after.
Make it 100, and then if I felt I was ready at 40, then all I would have to do was spend 6 weekends at the local mud hole making 5 30 min dives at 30ft per day with 10 min SI. boring but would qualify me. actually since I have a set of doubles, I could probably get more like about 15-20 dives in a weekend.

If I lived someplace nice like Florida then maybe I would shore dive 2-3 dives a day,33-50 days I would have 100. now If i lived in canada oh never mind those dudes are polar bears any way. I live in Texas, for me to get 100 dives I have had to travel to Mexico and dive off of motorized canoes, BVI dive off a sail boats, Bonaire fall out of bed and dive. and in between I take courses. How difficult would you have it be to get into a course to be paid nothing to watch after bad divers?

 

[DevonDiver]

I thought I was ready after 100 ocean dives. but by your math that is only 5 weeks of diving, it took me 2 years. and maybe you would say I am still not ready.

Having done those 100 dives.... are you now a more or less competant diver than you were 2 years ago?

Can you identify or define what specifically happened over that time/dives that would make you more or less competant?

my only real point is that the number of dives is arbitrary and not representative of the skills needed before the class or after.

Agreed...which is why I am also a big advocate of the need for a pre-assessment to determine suitability for enrolment on a DM course.

Make it 100, and then if I felt I was ready at 40, then all I would have to do was spend 6 weekends at the local mud hole making 5 30 min dives at 30ft per day with 10 min SI. boring but would qualify me. actually since I have a set of doubles, I could probably get more like about 15-20 dives in a weekend.

You have said that... but some of my training dives have followed a very similar profile to that (I completed OW and AOW in an ice-cold muddy quarry in the British winter...we had to leave the water regularly to prevent hypothermia). They would have been counted towards my pre-requisite.

Anyone could 'spin' meaningless dives into their logbooks...or for that matter, just write ficticious dives in. All you need is an empty logbook, a pen...and in an hour you could have logged a hundred dives.

That is why a pre-assessment is also needed.

If I lived someplace nice like Florida then maybe I would shore dive 2-3 dives a day,33-50 days I would have 100.

Yes, that is true. But that isn't relevant. Opportunity to dive is one issue. Having experience diving is another.

I want to improve my skiing.... but I live in the Philippines. I won't be signing up for a Skiing instructor course anytime soon........

How difficult would you have it be to get into a course to be paid nothing to watch after bad divers?

So, you suggest 'dumbing down' the DM course...on the basis that the job is low-paid?

The reward for being a DM is the opportunity that the qualification gives you to enjoy more diving (on a paid or unpaid basis). It would be nice if it gave you the added reward of achieving something meaningful.

In addition, "watching after bad divers" means that your skill and knowledge, or lack of, has a direct implication of the safety of others.

 

[joolz]

A long and interesting thread, even though it doesn't actually confirm or refute the original question of whether a requirements change is in the works :blinking:

Just to toss in my own $0.02, I don't see anything necessarily wrong with allowing people to start the DM course without already having flawless skills. I was a competent warm water diver when I started but still had some work to do in cold water, and the experience throughout my DM training made a HUGE difference in the way I dive now. Had I not gone through the training and just done the same number of dives on my own, I'd be a very different diver today. The number of logged dives doesn't help you if you're just reinforcing bad habits hundreds of times over -- by going back to participate in the rudimentary CW training, you're constantly reviewing the basic skills that you probably wouldn't do on your own.

An instructor is free to set whatever entry criteria they want, and there's no obligation to take on a DMC just because they've logged 20 dives and handed you a credit card. If an instructor is prepared to spend the extra time bringing DMC skills up to par, they should be free to do so; if an instructor would rather work with pre-qualified candidates to optimize the use of everybody's time, they should be free to do that too. The objective is to ensure that either way, the DMC are at the same level coming out of the course.

As others have said, the DM program would benefit from a practical exercise in leading divers independently. I'd like to see this linked in to the mapping project, which seems to be treated as an exercise in underwater cartography without much thought to why they're doing it or how a site map would be used. DMs should be able to create a map and then use that map to set a dive plan for a group of certified. The map should tell them all the relevant info they need to know -- entry point, depths, interesting features, hazards, etc -- but be presented concisely so divers can actually retain it. A sneaky instructor could also use this dive to throw in an unanticipated rescue scenario. Another instructor and I did that once with a DMC under the pretense of helping him with his map (heh heh heh)

One final comment is that the DM course is extremely rewarding when you can see material improvements in your own skills as you progress, and it inspires you to inspire others. If instructors restrict the course to people who already have all the skills and aren't going to learn anything, I have to wonder how much they're going to get out of it -- the whole course could just be seen as an administrative formality. If all DMs coming out of the course are competent and professional, what difference does it make what their skills were like when they started?

P.S. 20-40 dives per week?! This can't be the average, considering the high proportion of dive pros who have day jobs. Either that, or I'm WAY below average...

 

[RJP]

As others have said, the DM program would benefit from a practical exercise in leading divers independently. I'd like to see this linked in to the mapping project, which seems to be treated as an exercise in underwater cartography without much thought to why they're doing it or how a site map would be used. DMs should be able to create a map and then use that map to set a dive plan for a group of certified. The map should tell them all the relevant info they need to know -- entry point, depths, interesting features, hazards, etc -- but be presented concisely so divers can actually retain it.

The shop where I did my DM required just what you're talking about.

My mapping exercise involved a very detailed mapping of several attractions at the local dive quarry. Later in the program I had to lead a "Discover Local Diving" program with certified divers at the quarry, including - you guessed it - a detailed map and dive briefing.

I was also required to map and participate in all of the dive briefings in the OW, AOW, rescue and specialty classes I interned with (real classes, not "workshops") for a total of 18 or so "real world" maps/briefings.

 

[Kingpatzer]

To put things in perspective....

The average dive professional would easily exceed 20 dives in a week. (sometimes double this number).

I'm not sure if that's true or not. Plenty of dive professionals work in resort areas where that is the case, but plenty more work in Scuba shops part time all over the place. I doubt anyone around where I live make 20 dives a week, or even close to that.

Is one week's diving experience sufficient to go from zero to entry onto a professional level course?

My wife, who is a high school teacher, really turns her nose up at the idea of a Dive Master as being a professional. She equates the DM role in the class as the dive world equivilant of the classroom volunteer. They don't even rise to the level of a student teacher (who is allowed to teach any part of the curriculum while under indirect supervision of the teacher to whom they are assigned.)

PADI DM's are at best para-professionals. And that is even something of a stretch. The DM is there to schlep tanks, give a tour of the local area, answer basic questions, and keep folks busy till the instructor gets around to them.

They're the cruise director, concierge and entertainment. The most important role is to schlep tanks and gear. Not many dives are required to be able to do that well.

. . . responsible for the lives of others - with only 2-3 weeks of working experience?

Not many just out of school DM's are going to be put in a position where they are in charge of someone's life - and if they are, that's a total failure on the business hiring them, not on the DM or the DM program. Architect's just out of 6 year's of collage and a couple of summers of internships still don't get to design a bridge all by themselves for a reason.

The course should teach you everything you need to know.... but that is based on the assumption that you are a competant, experienced and capable independant diver when you enroll on the course.

Agreed.

If candidates were of a higher standard when enrolling on the course, there would be no need to amend the course itself.

Also agreed. I'm not opossed to raising the number of dives. Indeed I think it would be a good thing. Much of your suggested pre-test is a great idea. Raising the standards for the 'pro' track of training in PADI would go a long way to raising the standards of diving training in PADI.

As an instructor...I want to teach DM candidates how to become dive professionals.... not waste my time resolving their basic dive skills and inexperience.

Which is a great point. In my DM class my wife and I were the only one's who managed to get 5's on all of the skills (with the exception of the stamina stuff, which we still beat the rest of the class on except for some 20 year old guy). And let's face it, doing basic scuba skills slowly and clearly isn't rocket science.

But it is.....often. Hence the reason that so many dive instructors would lobby for stricter pre-requisites.

And it would be a good thing to have that. But the idea that dive masters are 'professionals' is really kind of ludicrous. Just cause someone gets paid for something they do doesn't make them a professional. If someone isn't allowed to fart in a classroom without the instructor's permission, they're hardly to be considered a professional. After all, if even PADI thinks DM's aren't capable of reading a power point presentation in a classroom, you know they don't think much of them at all.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

I have never logged a training dive

I am curious about this; PADI requires logging of dives as part of the training, so in theory if you do not log the training dives you do not qualify for the PADI certification (except cert's that do not require dives).

 

[BonaireDan]

I agree completely that experience tells the tale. The more experience the better. As an Insttructor with tons of dives in the Caribbean (Bonaire in particular) I am comfortable in that environment as well as quarries.

But - put me on a job in the PNW, NE, even SoCal I am out of my league. I would need much training before I can dive, these areas, much less DM /Instruct.

Standards can be dramatically strengthened IMO.

I will go so far as to suggest that the swimming standards for OW need to be dramatically strengthened. Many dive students could not stay afloat without BC/wetsuit and can not swim any distance in OW without fins. I think we are making divers out of non-swimmers - relying on the support of fins, wetsuits and BCs for buoyancy. That is really wrong as far as I am concerned.

 

[DCBC]

I will go so far as to suggest that the swimming standards for OW need to be dramatically strengthened. Many dive students could not stay afloat without BC/wetsuit and can not swim any distance in OW without fins. I think we are making divers out of non-swimmers - relying on the support of fins, wetsuits and BCs for buoyancy. That is really wrong as far as I am concerned.

Hi Dan, I totally agree. Historically, PADI has always had lower standards than other major training agencies. They realized in the early stages that diving certification is a business. Lower standards and training time equate to a lower course cost. In-turn this allows a training facility to certify more students annually, increasing the amount of equipment sales and subsequent profit. No one can deny their ability to grow into the world's largest recreational diver certification body, but at what cost?

 

[Kingpatzer]

DCBC - and there's the real issue behind all of these sorts of discussion. Diver certification has become a business apart from the business of diving. PADI doesn't care about anything beyond their certification and travel business.