To those considering an OW class...

[jbd]

Without changing agency standards from what they are now, if we could just get instructors to step up and accept the term "mastery" for what it is intended to be, I believe we would automatically have longer courses, with more dives. I don't find it all that difficult to say, "I know you tried hard and you made good improvement, but I think you have not yet mastered these skills. We need to get you back in the pool again to work on these until they become second nature and you have mastered them." What's wrong with that?

This is exactly where the changes need to occur--at the instructor level. Very well said Jerry.

 

[jbd]

I havnt got a camera so unfortunately I can't show you a pic, but my students are trimmed out when they leave my classes.

Ditto Azza's comments.

 

[Thalassamania]

Good points.

Of course, those were the days of double hose regulators, and before the BCD was even developed. Those were the days of J snorkels and high volume masks with purge valves, and the old Voit Viking full-foot fin.
Is that a reasonable comparison to current situations? Certainly technology, and improved skills, have changed some of that, no? After all, it took more training to be a Mercury Astronaut than it took John Glenn to ride along on the Shuttle... .

BTW: The shuttle takes far more training to pilot than did Mercury (remember spam in a can?). In both cases Senator Glenn was just along for the ride, something he objected to during the Mercury program.

I still use a J-snorkel, why was that harder? In the early days I used a Lince Cat-Eye, smaller volume than any mask today and no purge. I never used Voit Vikings, I used Duck Feet (which I still use sometimes today).

I don’t buy your premise that “better” gear results in shorter classes without compromising safety. Yes, some of the gear today is easier to use, but the students today are so much more difficult to teach. People learning to dive in the 50s and even 60s were water-folks, surfers, beach lifeguards, boaters and swimmers. They were expanding their water pursuits. Many diver trainees today arrive with little or no basic water skill, and surely with much less skill, on average, than they arrived with in the old days. Plus, back then you could actually fail some segment of the class. So there’s a time trade off here. Additionally the academic material has become much more voluminous and detailed requiring every so much more time to present. On balance I think that, more or less, it comes out about even. 100 hours is still the AAUS standard, and this is not for a course that includes any fancy underwater research techniques, that learning to be a safe and effective 30 foot diver.

But let's put that in perspective. 40 hours is what a typical semester-long 3-semester hour course in college provides in class time. Even the University scuba course, typically a 1 (or 2) semester-hour PE course, doesn't even require that currently.

PE courses do whatever they want and are rarely exemplars of what diver training should be. Universities with research diver programs typically offer a 100 hour (or more) course with 12 dives, and once again I must stress that this is not for a course that includes any fancy underwater research techniques, etc.

Actually, I dove with an insta-buddy in the late 1980's. He and his wife had each been certified by YMCA, and all they had were two open water dives.

If I remember right there was a period (late 1960s to early 1970s?) during which open water dives were recommended but not required and that resulted in there being both a Scuba Diver and an Open Water Diver card.

 

[jbd]

..... For me, ......

There is the key to making the changes being talked about in this thread. The instructor must step up and take the responsibility. Its quite obvious that neil has stepped up.

 

[dherbman]

Ditto Azza's comments.

Could you and Azza provide a brief outline of how you accomplish this?

Specifically:

Drills
Standards
Class size
Number of assistants
Length of class
Price of OW certification
Negatives

Thanks!

 

[kirwoodd]

First off, 1) congratulations on your entry into the greatest sport in the world and it's always nice to see another diver from Red Sox Nation.

Having said that, I can't see the point of an abbreviated class that offers "no skills". I just don't see how that is worth the consumer's money. They are taking what is purported to be a basic open water class - this class should provide them with the skills (all the skills) that are necessary to do recreational open water dives in my opinion.

Again, congratulations on your recent certification!

Thanks Matt!

Well, I cant really justify my position. I am saying "I liked the abbreviated, it worked for me" AND "they shouldn't do abbreviated"

I did the abbreviated, and took it for what it was worth, an introduction. Now I dive only with experienced divers on shallow dives trying to master my skills. So I feel like I am ok with the abbreviated.

HOWEVER, I think that MANY people take the (abbreviated) course and think that they know enough to dive on wrecks at 100'. Not good. Needs to be fixed.

Yes, its contradictory, but its where I am at.

and while I am here.....
I find it very useful to read accident reports, you know learning from others mistakes. Ever read an NTSB report on an airplane accident? AWESOME. Very detailed, can be good for learning what not to do. Is there anything like that for diving? I read the "Accidents and Incidents" forum on this board, but its more like "we lost john, so sad, lets all pray" which is VERY appropriate, but I dont learn from that. I am looking more for "john ran into mono-filament, got tangled, didnt have a knife, panicked", yes its cold, but THATS something I can learn from (take a knife, stay calm)

 

[Peter Guy]

As an "old timer/Noobie" in Scuba, I have to agree AND disagree with most of what has been written here.

I got certified in 1967 after taking a semester of Scuba as PE at my University -- 15 weeks of class -- 1 hour lecture and 1 hour pool per week. And we "didn't have no stinking BC's or Computers" back in those Golden Days of Scuba -- just a simple plate, tank with J-valve, reg, mask and rock hard fins. I believe we learned a lot and our skills were pretty darn good by the time we finished -- Oh, and just one open water dive was "suggested" before we went off on our own.

Last year my wife and I took OW (3 weeks (?) of 2 nights/week, 2 hours lecture, 1.75 hours pool/night) with our PADI LDS. Here we learned/practiced using the BC, Computer, Dry Suit, etc., and then had the 4 OW checkout dives. And yes, the skills were done kneeling on the floor or silting up the bottom. And, despite my wife's total ineptness, we both got certified -- then immediately went on to AOW certs before we left for a week in Maui. The time span between starting the program and finishing the AOW was probably about 8 weeks.

This spring we went to the BVI with some friends -- 3 of whom had just finished private/semi-private OW classes -- your "typical" quick and dirty type classes that seem to be the target of this thread.

Here's my take on how dangerous these various processes were:

1. In my original class did I learn a lot and were we able to practice skills, etc. until they were pretty firmly implanted? Yes -- of course. We had time to practice, reflect, practice, reflect and then practice some more -- and we had less to think about.

2. In our classes last summer did I learn a lot and were we able to practice skills, etc.? Yes, and we did -- AND we practiced some of them on our own because my wife just couldn't get some of them (practicing mask removing/clearing in the hot tub comes to mind!). Were what we learned as firmly ingrained as they had been with the other class? Of course not.

3. Did my friends who did the "express" type classes learn as much as we did? Yes and no.

BUT, and to me this is the important point, did all of us come out of the various learning experiences capable of doing some fun, enjoyable and SAFE recreational Scuba diving? ABSOLUTELY!!! And to me, that is the point of the classes and PADI should be congratulated for that (or at least not condemned!).

Our three friends did their first "recreational" dives with us in the BVI and they were fine -- Safe, cautious and having a ball discovering the joy of being underwater IN A REASONABLY CONTAINED SITUATION. One of them made my wife furious because his trim was damn near perfect the whole time while the other two certainly had their issues with trim, and yes, they just MIGHT have touched a reef now and then, but they weren't crashing onto things, they knew their limits and they stayed well within any possible safety parameter -- including being very aware of what the DM wanted them to do.

Were any of us "Master Divers" -- of course not. Were any of us unsafe or reckless -- NO. Did they learn what they needed to know from their "express" classes to be safe, concerned divers? Yes. Were they capable of creating their own dive plans to enter the Rhone? NO -- BUT that wasn't the point. They WERE capable of creating their own dive plans to dive a reef with a 30 ft average depth and they were safe in doing so (and yes, they all even practiced air shares, mask skills, etc. while swimming because they knew they were noobies).

You've got to start somewhere and what I've seen of the PADI curriculum seems to be as good a place as any. I didn't learn to fly a plane with a glass cockpit, retractible gear and jets -- I learned in a plane with simple guages, welded gear and a thingy that went round and round in front of me. Was I safe when I was let free? My instructor thought so (but who knows) -- but I was only safe within pretty restrictive parameters -- just like our friends were safe within the restrictive paramaters OF WHAT THEY WERE TAUGHT.

Last comments -- my 15 week course was great preparation -- HOWEVER, the only way I would have done that was to be a student and have that as a part of my life (BTW, I was required to take PE). There is no way, as a 57 year old businessman, I would have agreed to do 2 nights a week for 15 weeks just to swim UW and look at fishies. Breaking the system up into small chunks is the right way to teach in my ever so humble opinion.

(BTW, I really don't think it is a big deal if you dive out of trim, have sucky bouyancy, etc., AS LONG AS the RECREATIONAL diver is having fun and is NOT hurting the experience of others -- and please note the qualifiers.)

 

[jbd]

Could you and Azza provide a brief outline of how you accomplish this?

Specifically:

Drills
Standards
Class size
Number of assistants
Length of class
Price of OW certification
Negatives

Thanks!

Regarding bouyancy control I use a golf ball retrieval game which is started the first session after the required skills are taught. During this free time not only are the students expected to practice the skills taught but they are also doing the game concurrently. Not only do I watch and critique their skills practice I also watch and critique their game performance. The game has very specific, shall we say nitpicky performance standards that most can not master the first session but they are held to the standard through the critique and re-demo as needed. This continues through all 6 sessions. Other drills are added which involve acsent and descents with specified stops and a task to be performed at that depth. Again to my nitpickiness

Class size is small i.e. 2 to 4.

No assistants usually although for other skills(mostly the air sharing scenarios and rescue skills) there is an assitant for demo purposes.

Class length is 6 sessions which consists of roughly 2 hours of academics and 2 to 2.5 hours of pool time. Which is not an astonishing amount of pool time.

Cost in the past was $300 which included the OW cert dives(5 to 6 dives)

Negatives--none that I can think of.

Positives--The biggest positive was that the OW cert dives were really a good time. They were actually dives, as opposed to splash and dash skills on the platforms, many of which lasted 35 to 50 minutes and some as long as an hour UW. No chasing students up and down with bouyancy control problems no undue worries about bolting to the surface. Just a whole lot more fun than other situations I have seen other instructors in.

 

[jbichsel]

I'm a novice diver recently certified so with some my opinion has little value. I chose a 4 week course of private instruction for my comfort. I took that instruction very seriously and since certifying have been diving every weekend. I don't feel the length of my instruction made me a better diver, rather it gave me more confidence to practice my skills in the real world. In fact, each dive since certification has been a learning experience which noticeably improves my skill.

Since you are a novice diver, your opinion matter as much or more than anyones'. Many of us are from the "old school", like me, where instruction was 30+ hours of classroom, 6 pool sessions, and 8 OW dives. I just checked my old log book to make sure. Now whether or not that was PADI standards at the time, I don't know. But that's what my instructor "required". It took 5 weeks, and I remember having to study and work my butt off. But Gregg is like that.

A college level scuba course is, I'm certain, quit good. It is not, however, necessary to introduce a new diver to the sport. As others have stated, the course content is more a product of the university's need than any desire on their part to develope competent divers. For the record, I hold a masters degree so I am well versed in academia, and with all due respect the snobbery it can produce. While there may be a high attrition rate from diving, I am not yet convinced it is a direct responce to short certification courses.

Speaking for myself, I'm not saying that shortened courses, lowered standards are the sole cause for attrition, but that it is a contributing factor. As I've posted and others also, there are plenty of areas to point fingers.

I had the option to certify in one weekend (a dive instructor working with me) and simply felt uncomfortable. My goal wasn't to get a C Card as much as it was to learn to dive.

I commend you on your desire to search out and learn how to dive rather than how to get a c-card. I wish more people went into diving with this attitude.

In my humble opinion, some attrition comes from people having a less lofty goal. They wanted a c card so they could take a dive vacation. Once that was accomplished they had little interest.

I agree. Some attrition comes from this.

If they have problems finning, mask clearing and safty stops I suspect it was more correctly attributed to their lack of committment to the sport than inadequacy of training.

I don't wholly agree with this. There will be a certain number of people that this holds true for. However, IF student divers are properly instructed and taught skills properly in the frist place, then they become the standard.

But if an instructor does not have proper finning skills, how can he/she teach that skill? If he/she can't demonstrate a proper flutter kick, how can he/she hold the students to that standard? Emulation is a large part of how we teach skills. How many instructors even address at all, more than the flutter kick? How many OW instructors teach or even domonstrate the frog, modified frog, modified flutter, and explain when you would want to use these?

How many instructors tell students that if they are in an area with a silt bottom, that flutter kicking will stir up the silt and destroy visibility, so the frog kick would be more desireable?

My final opinion, yes this is all opinion, is that the dive experience begins with OWC. That's why I am currently working with my instructor to set up my advanced course et al. That said, if you gained your OWC through a college course I would certainly hope that you didn't end your education there.

No argument at all. OW is the beginning of a journey that has no end.

Ok, so maybe this is merely a case of semantics. Jump in guys and gals and tell me if I'm wrong, I have thick skin.

When we that at arguing for more rigid standards, longer classes say that we want "better" divers out of OW class, possibly what we are wanting is student divers with a higher confidence level, being more proficient in their skills.

We all know that an OW cert is a "license to learn" and says that a diver can "learn" (dive) without professional supervision. No argument to that. I think the issue comes where we see new OW divers that do not meet OUR criteria or level of "mastery" as we define it, to be off on their own.

But, when I see instructors that don't meet my level of criteria or "mastery" for an OW student, I view that as being a problem with the system. There is a flaw that allows for sub-standard perfomance to be acceptable.

I still learn on every dive. If I ever stop learning, get ready for some gear to become available.

Here is a point I addressed with PADI last week that just drives me nuts:

Confined Water Dive 1, Performance Requirement 7;

"7. Swim underwater with scuba equipment while maintaining control of both direction and depth, properly equalizing the ears and mask to accommodate depth changes."

Ok, so the only use of the BC so far, if an instructor is following minimum requirements, is Performance Requirement 2:

"2. Inflate/deflate a BCD at the surface using the low pressure inflator."

So holding on to the idea that we do have instructors that will only perform to the minimum, how do we hold students to the requirement of "maintaining control of both direction AND DEPTH,..." when we have not taught them to conrol depth?

Again, keep in mind that I am talking about the instructors that will only teach to minimum standards.

In CWD2, we teach them how to properl weight themselves, Performance Requirement 11: "11. Adjust for proper weighting, which is defined as floating at eye level at the
surface with an empty BCD and while holding a normal breath."

It isn't until CWD3 that we are even required to mention "neutral buoyancy"; Performance Requirement 1: "1. Independently establish neutral buoyancy under water by pivoting on the fin tips, or, when appropriate, another point of contact (both oral and low-pressure inflation)."

In my estimation this is wrong and part of the reason we have "divers" that crawl across the bottom. Since neutral buoyancy, staying off the bottom, not damaging the environment, is so strongly stressed, why do we (PADI) wait until the 3rd dive to start this skill?

Yes, I know that we can start addressing this issue in CWD1, as long as we don't move a skill from a future dive into CWD1 (idiotic precept), but again, I am addressing an issue that allows an instructor who will only meet minimum standards, the ability to provide less than what should be expected.

Sorry, having dived so many lakes in Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Colorado, Montana, the whole crawling on the bottom, stirring up silt is a major sore spot with me.

 

[Ice9]

I took my open water class from a university program. The agency that program used is irrelevant. As I recall, the program consisted of 15 hours of lecture and 21 hours in the pool. I'm not a dive professional so I can't speak to the current minimum requirements but I believe a standard program today is less than 10 hours in the pool.

Wow! I think my NAUI OW class was only 2 hours in a pool!

Anyway IMHO, ten hours is simply not enough for the average new diver to learn and practice all the skills they need to become comfortable with their gear or their environment. This has led to time spent on a specific skill to be reduced or the skill virtually eliminated all together. These sacrificed skills often show up later as new classes.

Have to agree here. Classes like "Buoyancy Tune-Up" and such are available through all the dive shops around here... I always thought that skill was just a little important

Well, because there is a very good chance the diver will soon drop out of the sport because after that first vacation for which he took his certification, he decided it really wasn't for him and here's why: he was nervous on the boat going out to the site. He was anxious getting in the water. He had a hard time descending. Once down his mask kept flooding and he was having a hard time clearing it - salt water stings. He couldn't keep from bumping against the reef (and getting stung in the process). Finally he found that he was unable to maintain his safety stop depth and spent the entire 3 mins swiming straight down to compensate for the air he neglected to vent from his BC.

Again, good point. I think that a lot of this in today's market has to do with the mindset of the diver. Many folks are not expecting this to be as challenging at first as it is. I know I was certainly still tense durring my post-OW dives, but that was also a little bit of a draw for me.

See, I viewed the experience sorta like taking my first solo flights in private pilot school. Nothing wakes you up and gets your blood flowing like looking over at the seat to your right and finding no instructor there. Its at that point that you realize, YOU are in charge of landing this thing and there is nothing anyone else can do for you. I got that same feeling diving after my OW class. I think for me that its the challenge of becoming a better diver that I love so much. If it were easy, I wonder if I would have taken to it so fanatically.

So please, spend the money now, take the longest class you can find or risk joining the crowd making room in their closet for the gear they'll never use again.

To all the experienced divers on this board who see a serious problem with the continual relaxing of standards, please help me resurrect the market for eight week classes.

8-week classes would be awesome! I would certainly have preferred this over a 2-weekend thing, if the option existed. Unfortunately, I didn't see anywhere where this was offered.