The Philosophy of Diver Training

[Crush]

The references to Brylske's article remind me of a conversation I had yesterday with a woman who was walking her dog at the dive site. She told me she got certified, but never did a single dive. "I just didn't feel comfortable down there," she told me. "I couldn't see, and it was cold."

I don't know whether spending more time, doing more dives, or developing a closer bond with the instructor would have made any difference to this woman. But I've heard this story more times than I can count.

I have been trying to keep up with this thread. Based on my limited personal experience, I would divide divers into three groups:

1. Dedicated diver;
2. Destination diver; and
3. The significant other.

I believe that everyone who has responded to this post falls withing category 1. However, most of the students in my basic OW class were firmly in category 2 - they wanted to be trained locally for dives they would be taking while at vacation destinations. I applaud them for doing the training locally as I feel that, in their case, the training is very likely to be superior to what they would receive at a resort. The final category of diver is the spouse/boyfriend/girlfriend/partner/interest of a diver (likely category 1), and such category 3 divers want to dive primarily as a means of spending more time with their significant other.

I am not sure if much can be done to persuade a category 3 diver to stay engaged, while it would likely take a lot to deter a category 1 diver. Perhaps diver retention or lack thereof should concern itself with welcoming the destination divers into the fold?

 

[DCBC]

Interestingly, of the ten divers that i know of who were in my original 1979 BOW class only two of us are still diving regularly. Not a stellar retention rate eh?

Actually a 20% retention rate over a period of 31 years is excellent! I doubt any of my buddies that I played football with in college are still playing. Only one of my buddies from the Canadian Mount Everest expedition in 1982 are still involved in mountaineering. You're doing great!

 

[InTheDrink]

Actually a 20% retention rate over a period of 31 years is excellent! I doubt any of my buddies that I played football with in college are still playing. Only one of my buddies from the Canadian Mount Everest expedition in 1982 are still involved in mountaineering. You're doing great!

The important point however, that appears to be being avoided is data to support retention rate one way or another.

Doesn't sound like anyone has it. If this is the case, then we're talking anecdotal evidence and speculation. Nothing wrong with these - they often present the accurate case - however they're very difficult to present a water tight case, again, one way or the other.

J

 

[Guy Alcala]

The reason why I think he got the cause for the lack of diver retention backwards is this; He thinks the lack of face time with an instructor in shorter courses leads to lack of motivation. I think that the longer, harder courses require more strongly motivated divers from the get-go. I never needed an instructor to give me motivation to dive, or climb, or ski; these were things I knew I wanted to do. An instructor or mentor just helped me to learn how to do so better or more safely, but boosting my motivation never entered into it. The idea seems ludicrous to me.

Originally posted by Thalassamania
I agree with you, in part, I do think that having an easily accessible community of divers that can provide buddies, mentoring and general encouragement may play a part.

I agree that helps, although it's not strictly necessary. I'm lucky to be able to do my 'local' dives in Monterey/Carmel where potential buddies are everywhere, my dive club's meetings are held within walking distance, and I can also walk to the LDS where I got my training (caveat: walking distance to me is 30 minutes or less). But although I found some buddies through the dive club, I've probably learned more about diving and met some of my best buddies on online forums, and I did my next 7 dives after certification solo the weekend following. So strong motivation was there, and I suspect I would be diving even without having a local (face-to-face) support community. Probably not as much, and I wouldn't have learned as much as quickly either, but it is doable.

I imagine it's a question of basic personality. For those for whom the social aspects of diving are primary, having that support group is critical. For the mildly misanthropic types like me, it's no big deal Indeed, when soloing at a site I know, I'm more relaxed when by myself.

Originally posted by Guy Alcala
As I opined upthread, diving is a niche sport. Always has been, always will be. The resort divers will dive occasionally, just as they may try a jet ski, or a climbing wall, or any other temporary amusement that doesn't require a lot of investment of time or money. In short, little commitment or motivation is required, and a resort diver course is ideal for these people, who make up what I call the recreational dilettante majority.

The much smaller number of people who know they want to become serious divers, just as those who are serious about any other recreation, will be willing to put in the time and/or pay for the training that allows them to expand their abilities to the greatest extent possible. That's why you see people enthusing over more extensive courses, because the people who want that type of class feel that they're finally getting value for their money. They're being challenged to expand their skills and knowledge. And unlike the 'everyone passes' courses, you get a real feeling of accomplishment when you've had to work to learn something. Not everyone can, but why should we encourage everyone to do so? The only excuse is to boost sales, and that has nothing to do with the diver and everything to do with the industry.

Originally posted by Thalassamania
Diving is just not that hard. If you are a decent swimmer, you can learn to dive, and learn to dive well. I have only failed one entry diving student in my life (and that was for mental problems that made him a danger to himself and to others).

Sure you can, but you have to want to do it pretty badly to buy all the gear, and put up with less than physically comfortable conditions while learning/doing. The people who're motivated will do so, and the rest won't because they don't think it's worth it. I mean, I considered myself a committed diver for 37 years or more before I ever put a reg in my mouth. I knew I would do it eventually, and would stay with it for a considerable period of time once I did, it's just that being active in other equipment/time intensive sports pushed the start back.

The references to Brylske's article remind me of a conversation I had yesterday with a woman who was walking her dog at the dive site. She told me she got certified, but never did a single dive. "I just didn't feel comfortable down there," she told me. "I couldn't see, and it was cold."

I don't know whether spending more time, doing more dives, or developing a closer bond with the instructor would have made any difference to this woman. But I've heard this story more times than I can count.

Originally posted by Thalassamania
Lynne, I suspect that it would make a difference. When a student has a longer training experience and is more integrated into a diving community, I think that there is a much higher likelihood that they'll latch onto something that keeps them interested and involved. Diving in cold, low vis water requires that they get to the point where they are warm (dry suit, likely) and have learned enough to look at the little things that abound. That's much easier and much more likely if the new diver comes in contact with others that have walked that path themselves, face it ... most instructors today keep their interest because they get to teach, not many instructors that I come in contact with do a whole lot of non-training diving.

Perhaps, but she sounds to me like someone who had a pretty low motivation to dive in the first place, i.e. a resort diver. She did at least have enough drive to get certified locally instead of doing a referral. I suspect that eliminating referral programs wouldn't change the number of committed divers significantly. But the total number of divers would drop considerably, thus boosting retention rates. Even though the U.S. population continues to increase, I think the plethora of recreation options available now means there's a fairly static number of (potential) committed divers out there; the only variable is the number of uncommitted divers.

Guy

 

[DCBC]

It appears that there are those who aren't convinced that the diver retention rate has changed at all. Putting this aside for a moment, diver training certification requirements for the most part have been reduced drastically over the past 30 years.

Although there have been improvements in diving equipment, I don't believe that equipment has ever been the leading cause of death and injury in diving accidents in the history of the sport. Accidents have been greatly attributable to diver error, which can only be reduced by more training instead of less.

When looking at this from a training philosophy perspective, I have to question why this has been the case? It seems logical to examine the motivation of the stakeholders in this regard. Who has a vested interest in reducing training time?

The Certification Agencies

A certification agency that maintains a comprehensive course can only process one certification fee for that training. A certification agency that modularizes that same program into 3 courses, increases their certification fees by 300%.

LDS and the Diving Equipment Manufacturers

The LDS who runs a short course potentially increases the number of students that they can process. Using the above example, this can potentially increase sales by 300%.

Diving Travel

With a higher number of divers available, it stands to reason that the number of people who want to participate in diving activities will greatly increase.

It seems suspicious to me that agencies that involve themselves in these areas may have a conflict of interest in trying to understand what the diver actually requires to dive safely.

Are the training standards what they are because that is all that's needed to maintain a high level of diver education/safety, or because lower standards are self-serving to the agencies involved; increasing profitability for the shareholders?

Is getting more people into the sport for the benefit of everyone really just a ruse for making more money at the expense of education and diver safety?

 

[TCDiver1]

Actually a 20% retention rate over a period of 31 years is excellent! I doubt any of my buddies that I played football with in college are still playing. Only one of my buddies from the Canadian Mount Everest expedition in 1982 are still involved in mountaineering. You're doing great!

Are you really being serious trying to compare football and diving in this context?

One can easily dive for a lifetime. Football at that level? Not so much.

 

[DCBC]

Are you really being serious trying to compare football and diving in this context?

As people age, many move on with other activities. I'm sure there are many cold water divers who don't find themselves excited about diving the same quarry over and over again. After some time, they often only dive when they go on vacation. Hauling gear, pulling on a suit, getting cold and not seeing anything new dampens their enthusiasm. This usually takes some time for the process to run its course.

The drop-out rate I was referring to isn't one where people dive for 10 or 20 years and quit, rather those who TS&M referred to: divers who finish their course and never dive because they don't feel comfortable. Personally, I think that this is attributable to insufficient training that doesn't allow some people to gain sufficient confidence in the equipment and in their own ability to use it.

More than ever before, people with little swimming ability (or none whatsoever) are strapping on scuba tanks and jumping into the ocean. Many of these have had little training and something eventually goes wrong. If the diver lives, they have had such a fright that they don't go back. This could have been avoided with a more comprehensive training program.

 

[Crush]

LDS and the Diving Equipment Manufacturers

The LDS who runs a short course potentially increases the number of students that they can process. Using the above example, this can potentially increase sales by 300%.

DCBC, I am not disagreeing with this assessment, but I am seeking clarification. The nearest true LDS to me (not including a "shop" sun out of someone's basement in my city) seems to be run by well-meaning, extremely hard-working people. From my outsider's perspective they seem to just be able to make ends meet. They are a NAUI shop. If they were to be able to increase their revenues by 300% by becoming a PADI shop, I think that they would jump at the prospect. Would they truly realize a marked improvement in revenue, or would the increased cash flow be eaten up by membership feed to PADI?

PS - I don't want to draw you into saying something that will make you liable.

 

[Walter]

The Certification Agencies

A certification agency that maintains a comprehensive course can only process one certification fee for that training. A certification agency that modularizes that same program into 3 courses, increases their certification fees by 300%.

Except that many won't take those extra two classes reducing the profit, but you can have more students, you can run them through quicker, so you certify 4 or 5 times as many students resulting in even higher profits than you thought.

LDS and the Diving Equipment Manufacturers

The LDS who runs a short course potentially increases the number of students that they can process. Using the above example, this can potentially increase sales by 300%.

That's the theory, but I don't it works very well for equipment sales. Many new divers don't feel like divers and therefore don't buy equipment. I believe longer classes would actually result in higher equipment sales.

 

[TCDiver1]

The drop-out rate I was referring to isn't one where people dive for 10 or 20 years and quit, rather those who TS&M referred to: divers who finish their course and never dive because they don't feel comfortable. Personally, I think that this is attributable to insufficient training that doesn't allow some people to gain sufficient confidence in the equipment and in their own ability to use it.

Okay, probably bad examples on both our parts.

It's still not clear to me that "early retention" rates are going down but i can say there was a major difference between me and many of the students i've certified. I was highly motivated to get certified. Like many my age, i saw shows like Sea Hunt, The Undersea World of Jacques Cousteau and that was all she wrote.

Many of the students i've taught over the years were not nearly that motivated. Many were only taking the class because a parent, sibling or significant other was encouraging them to, not because they wanted to. From my experience you just didn't see that sort of thing as much 30 years ago. The public perception was, diving wasn't for everybody, people who dive are crazy, etc, etc. It was much different back then if you recall.

So, from that aspect, i can see what your saying. The agencies, PADI in particular, have made diving much more accessible, more mainstream.