The Philosophy of Diver Training

[Walter]

I would say that your biggest issue is intimidation.

I've been told that before and I try to work on it, but I have a hard time recognizing when I'm doing it. I don't post things I think are intimidating. It's certainly not intentional and I will continue to work on it.

Certainly when I was new on this board and posted a particular event your comments were pithy and scathing and when I responded you never responded back. Not that I hold a grudge or anything

OK, I just conducted a search to find the offending thread. Were you posting as JClynes at the time? Was this about a wreck dive? I didn't see where you were looking for more feedback. It looked to me that your response showed you were getting your head screwed on right and had learned some valuable lessons from the dive.

your very direct approach I think might not always be the best.

The counter argument to that of course is that your very direct approach made me analyse in much more detail the course of my action so I would also say that your engagement is very welcome but perhaps some of the ways you do it could use a little finesse-ing shall we say.

I'll work on finesse.

Winning isn't always the desirable outcome in a discussion.

Winning is rarely my goal. I'm not a particularly competitive person. Often I continue a discussion long after I would like to quit not because I'm trying to win, but because someone seems to be misunderstanding my point. I really don't care if you agree or disagree, but I do want you to understand what I'm saying.

I don't view swimming ability as a major concern to diving. I think they are different skills.

They are totally different skills. You don't need to know how to swim to dive. You do, however, need to know how to swim to reduce the likelyhood that you will panic when something goes wrong when you are diving. Most of what I do in my Open Water class is to reduce the chances of the diver panicking when things go wrong. Things do go wrong.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

PADI Standard which in 1992 was 27 hours (I don't know what it is now).

In 2002, there was no minimum number of hours, although 31 hours were recommended.

The only restriction I know of is that you can not do more than 3 training dives per day and any confined water training is considered a training dive. Those restrictions force the class to be at least 2 days long.

 

[The Chairman]

I'll work on finesse.

No you won't. At least, you wouldn't be Walter if you weren't anal to the point of distraction. My first dive with Walter (as was discussed earlier) was in Blue Spring Florida. He prided himself then on logging every single dive. In his car was a jar of shark teeth he collected from Venice Beach. I think it said "300", at which point I quipped something like "What, did you count them?" Wally's answer was "Twice". He's anal. He has always been such.

Earlier I suggested that the swimming requirements for NAUI were not 12 cycles in 2002. Later I said "within five years or so". Statements like that drive Wally up a wall! He HAD to correct me and he missed my point in doing so. I talk in generalities. "Within five years" or so can mean anywhere between 7 down to 3. it might have been 8 and talking with someone, he thinks it will be 8 this coming DEMA. This affects how he perceives standards. Me? I am looking for a finished product. How we get there is not as important as what we produce. I could probably take a primer on web authoring and use it to make someone a diver. For me, it's not about the agency, it's about my student having fun and getting things down straight. It's about being efficient with my time so that I can teach them even MORE about diving and the things that I think matter.

Walter finds comfort in his standards. I find comfort in my freedom!

 

[Diver0001]

In his car was a jar of shark teeth he collected from Venice Beach. I think it said "300", at which point I quipped something like "What, did you count them?" Wally's answer was "Twice". He's anal. He has always been such.

This isn't anal. This is being stringently accurate. I certainly recognise this behaviour. I work with technical people in the fields of ICT and engineering on a daily basis and my piano teacher has this trait as well, as do 1/2 of the scientists on the planet (a statement that in itself will have Walter saying "O RLY?" LOL).

What all of these people have in common is that they are highly intelligent, strongly motivated to accuracy and what at least one psychological model I know of called "knowledge testers". They literally find comfort (mental and in some cases emotional comfort) in facts. Some people simply *need* this as an anchor for their normal behaviour.... to keep their keel running deep as it were.

There's nothing wrong with it unless they take it so far that all they can do is nit pick. In some cases it can also be caused by an autistic spectrum disorder (or so I've been told) but while there are a few of those around here too I don't believe Walter is of them imo.

But for someone like you (or me) it can be confusing. It's perfectly possible to talk to the "scientist" types about issues but it's on you (or me) to first get the facts straight. After that, the discussion can move on.

And believe me (as I know from my work) your "generalist" style is as irritating to them as their "pin point accuracy" is to you. But there's no sense in ridiculing it as "anal" because that does not do justice to what it is or why it's important to him. Both are normal and there are ways to get along if everyone just sort of understands what is making the other guy tick. It's something to "accept" about one another. There is no other alternative.

Walter finds comfort in his standards. I find comfort in my freedom!

This is another expression of what I was talking about above. Who is right? Both of you!!! you simply have different personalities whose anchor rests on different needs.

R..

 

[hg frogman]

Here is a first hand example of what instructors get paid in many tourist locations overseas. It may help understanding issues about the quality of the courses, and understanding who is actually responsible for this quality.

I hope that would-be instructors (and divers looking for a good course) will find it enlightening.

It's a tropical place with several dozens of dive centers, and hundreds of dive professionals, competing for business. I won't tell the name because I don't want to make advertising. Believe me or not. Anyway you can easily ask and check by yourself next time you visit a tropical location.

In most dive operations there, a free-lance instructor typically gets 12.5 US$ (10 euros) per guided dive (total payment, for up to 4 certified divers being guided). Typically he does 2 guided dives a day. Then at the end of the day he gets 25 US$ (20 euros) for 2 hours 30 minutes of work per day while guiding (2 dives + 2 briefings + 2 debriefings). I don't take into account the time spent on transportations, boats, etc, because it's basically the same time than for courses and I want to compare both.

The same free-lance instructor typically gets 125 US$ (100 euros) for an Open Water course for 1 student. He gets 25 US$ (20 euros) per extra student. Usually he doesn't have more than 2 students (bigger groups of students are for permanent staff, whose commission is smaller, and then cost less). If he has 2 students and makes the OW course in 4 days he will get 150 US$ (120 euros) for 4 days at 8 hours of work per day (32 hours is a minimum for a decent OW course for 2 clients). He gets then 37.5 US$ (30 euros) for 8 hours of work per day while teaching OW course.

Compare the two sums and the two times spent, and you will understand that there is a big temptation to reduce the overall time spent for the OW course, by skipping skills, by squeezing the course within 3 days, by not adding extra fun-diving at the end of the confined water sessions, etc.

Also there are often (not always) pressures on the instructor in order to have him do as quickly as he can, so the dive op can sell extra fun dives (or AOW course even) to the customers after completion of their course.

I let you find out who is responsible for this : the agency, that by producing too many instructors lowers their income (offer and demand), and that doesn't ensure its standards are respected ? The dive operation, who chooses its staff and who settles the rates and commissions, in order to minimize costs and maximize profits while facing the too many competitors ? The instructor, who accepts to work for peanuts (and even for free to "gain experience" after his IDC) ? The client, who is looking for something cheap and does not try to understand what's going on ? Or all of them ?

To make it complete, a permanent staff instructor there typically gets 625 US$ (500 euros) salary per month, plus a 25 US$ (20 euros) commission for every OW certification he will have done in the month. Typically he will earn in total 750 to 1000 US$ (600 to 800 euros) a busy month. Ultimately he is exposed to the same temptation.

The payment does NOT include accommodation and meals (except lunch) in both cases.

I am not saying it's everywhere like this. But it's like this in a lot of tropical locations.

Some dive operations have higher rates for the courses and pay more their staff (though courses rates and staff payment are not always correlated !). Some dive operations make sure that the standards are respected and that there is enough time devoted to the course. Usually these are not the cheapest.

The choice is yours.

 

[DCBC]

Still is. I wrote this somewhere else in the thread too but he keeps repeating 27 despite being corrected.

I don't know what to call that.

Well, you could call it the difference between 1992 and 2002 Standards, I suppose....

 

[Diver0001]

Yeah. I didn't know the standard had been increased

Either way I think we've beaten this until it bleeds. Let's move on now, shall we?

R..

 

[DCBC]

Certainly the quality of the instructor is an important factor when it comes to diver training, but I don't believe "it's the instructor and not the Agency." As instructors teach through various agencies, carry liability insurance which covers them as long as they are conforming to their agencies training requirements, the Agency is also an important factor. Add to this, that it is the Agency that stipulates the minimum training time and to a large extent, what is to be taught (course content) and in some cases, what cannot be taught.

I was surprised to see a CMAS ** diver being compared to a PADI OW diver in this discussion, with an "it depends upon the instructor" conclusion. Of course this is a factor, but even if the instructors were equal in their ability, what is the logical conclusion to who will most likely turn out the better diver:

a) Instructor A's training course has no minimum time limit, but 31 hours is recommended

b) Instructor B's training course has a minimum of 100 training hours and 26 training dives

Even if the comparison was between the requirements of a PADI AOW and a CMAS ** they wouldn't compare. This isn't "Agency Bashing," but it's important to point out the facts.

I'm not saying that any agency has better instructors than another. What I am saying is regardless of the instructor's quality of instruction, the level of diver competence is affected by the quantity of instruction given.

It's likely that any instructor (regardless of affiliation) should be able to train a diver more thoroughly if they are given more time to do so. When looking at the quality of the training given by the various certification agencies, it is reasonable to look at the scope of the training they provide.

 

[hg frogman]

Certainly the quality of the instructor is an important factor when it comes to diver training, but I don't believe "it's the instructor and not the Agency." As instructors teach through various agencies, carry liability insurance which covers them as long as they are conforming to their agencies training requirements, the Agency is also an important factor. Add to this, that it is the Agency that stipulates the minimum training time and to a large extent, what is to be taught (course content) and in some cases, what cannot be taught.

I was surprised to see a CMAS ** diver being compared to a PADI OW diver in this discussion, with an "it depends upon the instructor" conclusion. Of course this is a factor, but even if the instructors were equal in their ability, what is the logical conclusion to who will most likely turn out the better diver:

a) Instructor A's training course has no minimum time limit, but 31 hours is recommended

b) Instructor B's training course has a minimum of 100 training hours and 26 training dives

Even if the comparison was between the requirements of a PADI AOW and a CMAS ** they wouldn't compare. This isn't "Agency Bashing," but it's important to point out the facts.

I'm not saying that any agency has better instructors than another. What I am saying is regardless of the instructor's quality of instruction, the level of diver competence is affected by the quantity of instruction given.

It's likely that any instructor (regardless of affiliation) should be able to train a diver more thoroughly if they are given more time to do so. When looking at the quality of the training given by the various certification agencies, it is reasonable to look at the scope of the training they provide.

I obviously agree.

If you make reference to one of my previous posts regarding the importance of the instructor (?) I stated that yes, the instructor is of uttermost importance; I should have mentioned "everything else being the same" (ie for a given course, or for the choice between very similar courses) but that seemed quite obvious to me. (I will edit this previous post accordingly).

OW course and CMAS** are not similar courses and I insisted on it already.

 

[The Chairman]

This isn't anal.

Walter is a dear friend, and I believe he accepts that many of us find him anal about these things. Quite often this leads him to major in the minors. That's not to say that I don't have flaws. They are legion and more pervasive than Walter's. Such is my humanity.