Training agency throws Instructor under the bus while misleading the court

[Tony387]

So basically, all the lawyers (and judges who are also lawyers) were laughing all the way to the bank. Despicable.

Your comment completely misses the point...

 

[cerich]

I had a woman lie about her asthma, and all I can say is that I was very happy that I was just a couple of feet away in 4' of water, with nobody else to watch.

I assisted in a "rescue" of somebody on a DSD, while giving him CPR his chest started to bleed thru his t shirt from the recent open heart surgery he had..he lied on the form. Oh, as we loaded the corpse on the ambulance...his instuctors surfaced and asked what all the fuss was, rhey had 16 students on the dsd and didn't miss the dead one....

 

[FinnMom]

As a dive club in the CMAS system, we don't do commercial classes (i.e. instructors are unpaid and classes are taught for the benefit of the club = new members). We usually keep a ratio of 2 open water students per instructor (3:1 tops even in the pool, in open water 2:1).
I can't imagine doing a discover scuba dive as anthing more than 1:1. A higher ratio makes no sense exactly (as other have said) because the students can go in 2 different directions; with that little training and preparation it's much too likely they will indeed do so - or something else equally unique and interesting.
I know that some places in the world it's relatively normal for 1 dive master or instructor to take a small flock of students or vacation divers, I've watched them for instance on the Thistlegorm. Good lord but I felt sorry sorry for the dive leaders. It looked like trying to drive a flock of chickens through a supermarket without damaging anything or losing one. Those poor bastards must have a darn high incidence of premature graying.

 

[boulderjohn]

Padi wants instructors to teach the skills in standards, to teach beyond that is in fact a standards violation.

That's not at all true, Chris.

PADI does not allow an instructor to withhold certification because the student fails to do something beyond the standards. Not only can they teach additional stuff, they are encouraged to do so. An article written by its President and CEO explaining this is required reading for instructors during their training. There is no certification involved with DSD.

The DSD course does several things that must be taught, including inflating a BCD to attain buoyancy at the surface. It does not specify a number of things that would normally be considered basic fundamentals of diving. It does not specify teaching how to put on fins or clear a regulator, either. These are common sense.

Here are the ssections of the standards related to ratios and supervision:

Ratios
You must apply continuous and sound judgment
before, during and after the dive. It’s your professional
responsibility to conduct a risk assessment by evaluating
variables such as water conditions, temperature, visibility,
water movement, entries and exits, ability of participants,
certified assistants available, your and your assistant’s
personal limitations, etc., to determine what ratio will fit
the situation — reducing the ratio from the maximum if
needed. Take into account changing variables and your
ability to directly supervise and observe participants.
Reassess during the dive.

Supervision
Do not leave participants unattended, either at the surface
or underwater.
• Position yourself so that you or a certified assistant can
make immediate physical contact with, adjust buoyancy
for, and render assistance to, participants.

 

[Wookie]

Skills standards and instructor standards are 2 completely different animals. One defines the minimum the student must do to pass a module or course. Standards for instruction are completely different. They are designed to guide the instructor through the conduct of his course, and give the agency the opportunity to hang the instructor out to dry. The maximum ratio for a DSD is 4:1. I would maintain that the instructor cannot control 4 students in any given situation, and that the standard is designed for the instructor to fail. This has nothing to do with establishing positive buoyancy at the surface, which is a standard for the student to pass, but gives the training agency an "out" in the event the worst happens. Your quote

You must apply continuous and sound judgment before, during and after the dive.

is the out for any agency to bounce an instructor. Why? Because THE AGENCY DOESN'T TEACH, OR EVALUATE THE INSTRUCTOR'S SOUND JUDGEMENT. Judgement is learned from experience, and 100 dives does not make an experienced instructor. Instructors are evaluated on knowledge and skills only, which is a major failing of the modern instructional system.

But as a professional educator, you already know this, and you probably have a solution. I'd love to hear it.

 

[boulderjohn]

Instructors are evaluated on knowledge and skills only, which is a major failing of the modern instructional system.

But as a professional educator, you already know this, and you probably have a solution. I'd love to hear it.

I wish I did have a solution. As a lifelong educator, I can say without a doubt that professional judgment is a critical skill. It is very hard to teach, and it comes primarily from experience.

Here is an embarrassing example from my past as a teacher. In my first year, I saw a teacher having a verbal altercation with one of her students in the hallway outside her classroom. the boy started to walk away, and she ordered him to come back. He ignored her and continued to walk away. I walked after him and told him to stop. He took off running. Being young, athletic, and foolish, I took off after him. It took about 15 minutes, but I finally tracked him down in a construction zone near the school. Several years later I was in a similar situation, when a student walked and then ran away from me when I told him he had to go to the office with me. Being more experienced, I shrugged and walked to the office by myself. Before I got there, the student had joined me, having figured out that he couldn't run forever, and his disobedience would get him into more trouble than he was in originally.

That wasn't covered in any of my teacher training. You can't cover everything in that training. Teachers have a thousand times more time spent in their training than scuba instructors. They have to pass rigorous exams, both in performance and knowledge, in order to be certified. They are closely evaluated by supposed education experts repeatedly, year in and year out. They are required to take additional training throughout their careers. Despite all of that, a whole lot of them suck big time.

No, I don't have a solution. I wish I did.

 

[Wookie]

That wasn't covered in any of my teacher training. You can't cover everything in that training. Teachers have a thousand times more time spent in their training than scuba instructors. They have to pass rigorous exams, both in performance and knowledge, in order to be certified. They are closely evaluated by supposed education experts repeatedly, year in and year out. They are required to take additional training throughout their careers. Despite all of that, a whole lot of them suck big time.

No, I don't have a solution. I wish I did.

And when I taught DSDs 8:2, I didn't have much experience of being a dive instructor, but I had run reactor plants, and required corporations to be in compliance with environmental laws for the past 15 years. I KNEW that to control the student, someone needed to be on top to get them if they bolted, and someone else needed to be underwater to stay with the rest. No one taught me that, they allowed me to take 8 students by myself.

But for any agency to set a standard that will rely on the judgement of an instructor to keep the instructor and the agency out of trouble, then not evaluate the judgement of the instructor is asking for a fail. And one happened here. And I don't blame the instructor, because we've all done stupid things. Hopefully, most of our stuoid things don't result in someone's death.

The answer to the problem is twofold: First, I have no issue with 8:2 for any class. But if you don't have the 2, you cannot positively maintain control of all students unless the ratio is 1:1. So, the agencies need to establish a requirement for a teaching assistant for any class size of more than 1.

Second, if you want to become a Captain, you must have 3 references of other Captains. Those references come with a $10k fine of you blow off a reference. It doesn't mean that no one blows off a reference, but it does make you go Hmmmm. In the same vein, if you want to become an instructor, you should need 3 references from instructors you have DM'd for. This will not solve the problems from students at the instructor mills, which need to go away, but if the training agency required 3 references of the candidate, and made the references blind (the agency collects the references without the candidate seeing them), and make the references have a penalty, as in, if the candidate exhibits poor judgement, investigate the referring instructors, that would cut back on a lot of poor instructors, and help solve the judgement issue.

But that would take willpower, and looking at the fatness of the world today, it's obviously lacking.

Edit. I am sometimes asked to be a reference for a Captain Candidate. I send the reference directly to the NMPC, not to the candidate. Sometimes they become Captains, sometimes they don't.

 

[boulderjohn]

Is this be the case that triggered this addition on all the PADI Release forms?

I will address this in more detail as an attempt to highlight the problem in a generic sense. Right now it is affecting PADI specifically. With the precedent being set, it will soon affect all scuba agencies and will lead to bigger changes than this.

I talked about the case at great length with a key member of the defense team, a person whose name will be well known to just about everyone participating in this thread. The case involved a dive club that had chartered a boat for a three tank dive day. The club included two DMs who took over supervisory duties for their club for the day, including taking roll before and after the dives. At the end of the first dive, they missed a name and continued on with the planned day, leaving the site without realizing they had left a diver in the water. PADI was included in the lawsuit, and they lost, despite their statement that they had no direct role in supervising the actions of the DMs. There were no standards in play there, and successfully calling the roll is not normally part of an agency's DM training.

Think about that in a generic sense--don't apply the specifics of that case or this case to a generic situation in which a professional does something really wrong in the performance of his or her duties. Think about the case a number of years ago in which a DM leading a dive took basic OW divers to a depth well beyond recreational limits and then (among other sins) refused to share air when one of them went OOA and specifically went to the DM for help. Think about the DM a couple years ago who saw a diver struggling on the surface and decided to help him by removing his highly inflated BCD while leaving his heavy weight belt on. Each case went to a lawsuit--should the training agency have been included in those cases?

In this thread the discussion is about an agency throwing a professional "under the bus" by blaming him for poor decisions an incident. We appear now to be in a situation in which a professional can throw any agency under the bus by doing something really stupid. With such a precedent, it could be any agency that could be held liable for the actions of the people it trained, even if they did that training decades before. Every agency needs to have that in mind now. The potential impact on diving is huge.

 

[Wookie]

I will address this in more detail as an attempt to highlight the problem in a generic sense. Right now it is affecting PADI specifically. With the precedent being set, it will soon affect all scuba agencies and will lead to bigger changes than this.

I talked about the case at great length with a key member of the defense team, a person whose name will be well known to just about everyone participating in this thread. The case involved a dive club that had chartered a boat for a three tank dive day. The club included two DMs who took over supervisory duties for their club for the day, including taking roll before and after the dives. At the end of the first dive, they missed a name and continued on with the planned day, leaving the site without realizing they had left a diver in the water. PADI was included in the lawsuit, and they lost, despite their statement that they had no direct role in supervising the actions of the DMs. There were no standards in play there, and successfully calling the roll is not normally part of an agency's DM training.

Think about that in a generic sense--don't apply the specifics of that case or this case to a generic situation in which a professional does something really wrong in the performance of his or her duties. Think about the case a number of years ago in which a DM leading a dive took basic OW divers to a depth well beyond recreational limits and then (among other sins) refused to share air when one of them went OOA and specifically went to the DM for help. Think about the DM a couple years ago who saw a diver struggling on the surface and decided to help him by removing his highly inflated BCD while leaving his heavy weight belt on. Each case went to a lawsuit--should the training agency have been included in those cases?

In this thread the discussion is about an agency throwing a professional "under the bus" by blaming him for poor decisions an incident. We appear now to be in a situation in which a professional can throw any agency under the bus by doing something really stupid. With such a precedent, it could be any agency that could be held liable for the actions of the people it trained, even if they did that training decades before. Every agency needs to have that in mind now. The potential impact on diving is huge.

Sounds like we need to tighten our QA. Maybe why Pat left?

 

[boulderjohn]

Sounds like we need to tighten our QA. Maybe why Pat left?

I really don't have an answer. I am truly baffled about what is going to happen in terms of liability.

I have never heard of lawsuit involving teacher malpractice or doctor malpractice or attorney malpractice that included the college that trained the individual involved. If that is the direction that scuba lawsuits will take, I don't know what can be done. How far are we away then from holding the certifying instructor responsible? If some day 10 years from now a DM that I trained misses a name in a roll call and leaves a diver at the dive site, will I be sued for that as well, even though I may have long since retired and have not maintained any liability insurance?