Suspended Course Director

[leapfrog]

I have worked with a few instructors with less dives than me (not by much) and while they were competent it was hard for me to really look up to them. I expect an instructor to have significantly more experience and skills and knowledge.

I think PADI should raise the minimum dives to at least 100 for DM and 200 for AI/I. That might at least put a pinch on these 3 month zero to hero programs.

I certainly agree with the sentiment. The problem with that might be that there are people crossing over from non recreational diving (commercial, technical, military, etc) and such a rule may be a deterent to good guys who are really instructor capable.

The zero to hero programs have got to stop. The best way to stop them is to sanction the people who offer them. That appears to be the case cited by the OP, although we don't know that as a fact. Maybe the answer is putting in a minimum time elapsed from finishing AOW to RD, from RD to DM and from DM to OWSI.

Certainly an interesting topic....

 

[diver 85]

Whoa, pardna... I most definitely am confused, but if I'm not then I think I see the problem.

You just got OW certified, and you went to Mexico to get the remainder of your courses up to IDC? In one trip?

I think I might see the reason the course director lost his accreditation.

IMO, the rear end of the cart just nailed the horses nose............man, get some experience somehow, that way tou won't be putting your right fin on your left foot( & visa-versa) & swimming in circles.....

 

[Melicertes]

I think PADI should raise the minimum dives to at least 100 for DM and 200 for AI/I. That might at least put a pinch on these 3 month zero to hero programs.

My concern with this type of yard stick is that there really is no way to realistically verify or confirm that there were actually 50, 100 or 200 dives done. A log book is useless for that.

So short of having a third party who could independently verify each dive for each student this will forever be a flawed measure, regardless of the certifying agency.

 

[Melicertes]

The zero to hero programs have got to stop. The best way to stop them is to sanction the people who offer them. That appears to be the case cited by the OP, although we don't know that as a fact. Maybe the answer is putting in a minimum time elapsed from finishing AOW to RD, from RD to DM and from DM to OWSI.

Certainly an interesting topic....

I agree. Although minimum time also seems vague and ambiguous and doesn't necessarily mean anything because you would need an accurate gauge on minimum actual bottom time, not simply surface time to judge a student's experience (not necessarily skill level) more accurately.

 

[almitywife]

i dont get it, you are a OW diver in cancun for a IDC :huh:

edit: opps - others beat me to it while ive been sitting here thinking abou it

 

[ReefHound]

My concern with this type of yard stick is that there really is no way to realistically verify or confirm that there were actually 50, 100 or 200 dives done. A log book is useless for that.

So short of having a third party who could independently verify each dive for each student this will forever be a flawed measure, regardless of the certifying agency.

That type of yard stick is already in use, just that the current required numbers are lower. If someone is going to cheat, they are going to cheat. An instructor can use judgment if he thinks the logbook is legit. Now if the instructor is in on the cheat, there's no independent verification the skills were even performed much less the required dives.

 

[Melicertes]

That type of yard stick is already in use, just that the current required numbers are lower. If someone is going to cheat, they are going to cheat. An instructor can use judgment if he thinks the logbook is legit. Now if the instructor is in on the cheat, there's no independent verification the skills were even performed much less the required dives.

Yep, that is just the problem, I have encountered too many operations where the $$ is more important so it's more often a question of:
Instructor: "How many dives have you done?"
Student: "100"
Instructor: "Can I see your log book?"
Student: "I'm sorry, I lost it." or "I filled up my first log book so I started another one with the first page following on where I left off in the one that ran full. Oh, and I don't have the full one here with me either."
Instructor: "OK, no problem."

IMHO the log book thing as a measure of experience remains a flawed practice because nobody can or really wants to enforce the minimum dives yard stick rules unless they are ok with losing the $$ and having the student bugger off to some other instructor who couldn't care less and would take their greens with a smile on their faces just the same. The end result is that whether a log book is produced or not, whether it's valid or not, the diver is inevitably allowed to start the training. Now I'm sure there are instructors/LDS' who would rather lose the $$ but honor the rules in an attempt to at least keep within the intended spirit of the yard stick rules, but I do think they are by far in the minority.

Now, if a diver is required to enter a DM or AI/I course as an intern who is required to perform said number of dives while being on training where the dives can be verified, then I'm willing to bet the yard stick becomes much, much more accurate. But people won't want to do that because that means working harder and longer for their "babe-magnet badges" :mooner: instead of going from OW->OWSI in three months for the right price. It all boils down to economics and maximizing profits.

The bottom line is - trusting a bunch of log book pages that claim to indicate a diver's level experience is IMHO mostly wishful thinking.

 

[Melicertes]

If someone is going to cheat

Oh and SBTW, I reckon there's so much cheating going on right in front of our eyes that it's almost business as usual these days. Perhaps I'm being pessimistic, I know there are lots of good, solid operations/operators out there, but make no mistake hearing of a CD being suspended and now having one of his prospective students tell us of what sounds like a shady deal, it comes as no surprise to me to think this guy could possibly have been cheating, and wouldn't have cared less about his log book even if he were Rescue certed. How many other OW divers in instructors clothing, with his signature on their course docs, now run around the globe because of it? I think I've seen a few in my neighborhood just recently actually :mooner:

 

[John_B]

Its not as if these "zero to hero" (as you call them) programs are new. There are a number of IDCs that do these, including *two* in Cancun. ProDive in Ft Lauderdale had the same thing until recently. They basically run a new diver through OW, AOW, a bunch of specialties and Rescue up to twenty dives and DM. Then the DM/candidate "interns" on a dive boat and for other OW classes, until they have enough dives to do the instructor classes.

We may not like that its that easy to fast track to be an instructor but, at least theoretically, they are doing the 100 dives and interacting with students this way. Better than the guy who does 70 quarry dives to 30' for 20 minutes each just to get to 100...

I think we'd all prefer a higher standard, but there would still be people trying to figure out how to sell "living the dream" if it was 200 dives than if it was 100.

 

[rjack321]

The potential instructors who really have their sheit together are obvious in the water. Unfortunately CDs are sometimes not qualified to judge and/or don't care if the diver will make a good instructor. Its not about time or logbooks or anything other paperwork. PADI is too big to actively manage the dive/teaching skills of every potential instructor unfortunately.