What is the real difference in the training

[TSandM]

beano, I honestly wish I could someday observe or assist with one of your classes. I like what you're saying about proprioception and kinesthetic retraining. As a victim of severe instability in yaw and roll, I understand what you are saying about those things, and I also suffered from severe difficulties with interpretation of visual information underwater, which was intensely necessary for me when gravity was no longer an orienting modality.

I suspect you do EXTREMELY well with kinesthetic learners, and perhaps with visual ones as well.

I am neither, although I have good body awareness as a result of years of learning it from riding. I am a visual and analytical learner. I work best if everything is thoroughly explained beforehand (which my OW class was NOT) and if I have visual models to emulate (which I didn't). I do extremely well with complex debriefs and the visual feedback of video, which allows me to compare my kinesthetic information with the objective data provided by film.

Honestly, I don't know if you would have done any better teaching me to dive than the folks who did try to teach me. I am not your kind of student. The GUE class is not designed for your students; it's designed for me. One would hope a good instructor would have the flexibility to adjust the class to the students who present themselves for it, but in general, the folks who will show up for a GUE-type class are a DIFFERENT kind of student from the resort OW diver trainee. You can teach them differently, and I think you often need to.

 

[beanojones]

Recently my wife decided to start diving again (after 3 years out) and asked to start-over in a BP/w with long hose and the team diving approach. I filmed her first 10 dives. In the beginning she was not comfortable with her buoyancy or trim. After 5 dives she was doing okay. After 10 dives she was doing mask removals, shooting a bag, and air shares with a long hose, properly, without losing position; as well as mostly proper execution of all the various propulsion and ascent strategies. Much of that was accomplished because she was able to see herself on video (often while still in the water immediately after something was recorded) and made adjustments. She even refused to get in the water at times if I didn't have my camera with me or hadn't replaced the batteries before the dive so she can see herself and learn from it.

...Plus more...

Clearly, I issued a sweeping dismissal of video that was overly broad. Your example is a good one. In my defense, I will say that as an already certified diver, she had (likely) gotten beyond a certain amount of discomfort, and already learned some new behaviors for underwater.

More importantly, a diver doing it by themselves might need video because they are inexperienced and untrained in spotting sticking points, how to bring them to a head, and how to correct them, whereas an instructor should have the ability and commitment to effectively bring hiccups to a head, diagnose the hiccups and correct them on the fly as a matter of course. As said before, people can teach themselves to dive without ever using an instructor, used to do so regularly, and still do in many places. Instructors should, however, dramatically increase efficiency. A few properly briefed and evaluated dives made with an instructor, should replace what it takes a diver 10-20 dives (or many more) to discover on their own.

(Not that it is basic scuba, but this point is made by experienced sidemount instructors all the time. People can learn sidemount on their own, but a class of three or four dives with a good sidemount intructor replaces several dozen sidemount dives done by a diver alone. And that is when the diver is already experienced in the water and just changing to using new equipment.)

I think I can and do make quick corrections to dive behavior that allow for the same degree of learning in a shorter period of time because I design the course and the dives to bring hiccups to a head, diagnose those hiccups, and give quick corrections in the water on the fly. I do not think I am special in this regard: any reasonably trained and experienced instructor can recognize little hiccups (neck position, muscle tension, etc. etc.) that cause big performance hangups. If there is something particular about my approach (and maybe there is not), it is that I am completely committed to making the corrections in the water, on the fly, by properly briefing what I am looking for, and will be correcting, and then spotting and correcting. Thus, right after failing to do be able to do something, a quick correction allows students to reach a sense of success by trying a successful approach before leaving the water. This means the behavior gets programmed in much more quickly, and more permanently, than if covered in video review, or in a debrief. I also specifically design the dives to bring sticking points to head many times on every dive. Students then can reach the sticking point, try and fail, be corrected, and then succeed in the next attempt without ever leaving the water.

In using video (or debriefs) to correct problems, the sense of accomplishment is delayed because the student cannot immediately try it out, thus there is no physical feedback available to convince the body which doubts everything that is not shown to be effective immediately. I could tell student what they need to do in a post dive video review, or a post dive debrief. But until they can put it into practice, there is no reason to believe me, other than blind faith. Since almost all behaviors underwater run counter to expectations, there is no real reason other than blind faith to believe in new strategies, unless the strategies are tried and found to be successful, on the fly, immediately after failing to succeed using a land based instincts and strategies. If an instructor is counting on a debrief or a video review to correct problems, then sticking points cannot be brought to head multiple times on one dive, or the student just suffers from spiraling frustration, as they fail, and then fail, and then fail again. They end the dive frustrated and feeling inadequate. It's not particularly conducive to learning to be frustrated with oneself. And frustrated divers are far less likely to be able to extend blind faith to an instructor who has led them to a sense of frustration and inadequacy.

Even if they can get past the sense of inadequacy and frustration, the mind might be convinced, but the body (and unconscious reactions) are a harder sell. Video (or debriefs) send messages to the forebrain, which is forgetful and unreliable, and there is a delay before they can be put into practice, thus there is a question of if they will be programmed correctly, or at all. Programming body behaviors in frees the mind to do other stuff during the dive.

 

[supergaijin]

I believe a major factor in training comes down to location. Comparing 3-4 day vacation courses and 'hometown' courses is apples to oranges.

When I taught in NZ in a local shop, the clients came after work and during weekends. Their mindset was different. Classes were classes in that if you missed one, you needed to catch up at additional cost, or wait until the next scheduled class.

Vacationers come to relax and many put their diver training as something to do on holiday in between the buffet and the bar. Certain islands here in the Maldives are what we call "diver islands" with a different philosophy towards training, but too many of the 5* resorts are geared towards rich executive types who consider carrying a weightbelt to be hard work and will create PR problems if asked to do something which 'normal' divers would consider to be just a part of the experience.

5* resort DC's have their hands tied to a certain extent as it cannot compete with the 'customer is always right' philosophy of the resort.

Too many divers in all locations believe that they are paying for their license when learning to dive. They need to understand that they are paying for training towards getting a license. Independent testing would in some way help to change this concept- just liked car-driver training with a separate examiner. Even if the examiner was affiliated with the same shop- it's do something towards changing the client's perception of what they are paying for.

 

[Thalassamania]

I believe a major factor in training comes down to location. Comparing 3-4 day vacation courses and 'hometown' courses is apples to oranges.

Then someone is outside of standards and should not be permitted to teach diving any more.

When I taught in NZ in a local shop, the clients came after work and during weekends. Their mindset was different. Classes were classes in that if you missed one, you needed to catch up at additional cost, or wait until the next scheduled class.

Vacationers come to relax and many put their diver training as something to do on holiday in between the buffet and the bar. Certain islands here in the Maldives are what we call "diver islands" with a different philosophy towards training, but too many of the 5* resorts are geared towards rich executive types who consider carrying a weightbelt to be hard work and will create PR problems if asked to do something which 'normal' divers would consider to be just a part of the experience.

Then they should fail the course, what's so hard about that?

5* resort DC's have their hands tied to a certain extent as it cannot compete with the 'customer is always right' philosophy of the resort.

Not when the customer becomes a student they are not longer always right.

Too many divers in all locations believe that they are paying for their license when learning to dive. They need to understand that they are paying for training towards getting a license. Independent testing would in some way help to change this concept- just liked car-driver training with a separate examiner. Even if the examiner was affiliated with the same shop- it's do something towards changing the client's perception of what they are paying for.

That's what is claimed for the ITC process and we all know just how independent and rigorous that is.

 

[endurodog]

Too many divers in all locations believe that they are paying for their license when learning to dive. They need to understand that they are paying for training towards getting a license. Independent testing would in some way help to change this concept- just liked car-driver training with a separate examiner. Even if the examiner was affiliated with the same shop- it's do something towards changing the client's perception of what they are paying for.

That however gets back to the old argument of who would be the ultimate admin of such a program? If it's like car driver training it would be a gov agency and all the fun that goes with that. Or (flame suit on) how bout the largest cert agency in the world?

 

[supergaijin]

Then someone is outside of standards and should not be permitted to teach diving any more.

Err... who said anything about not respecting standards?

I stand by my point that vacation divers/students are treated differently than locals. I'm not saying that I agree with it- but in my experience in local shops in NZ, vs. backpacker shops in Phils, Malaysia and Thailand, vs. flashpacker hotels in Egypt, vs. military training in Djibouti, vs. 5* in the Maldives, the training is different and the attitude of the trainee is extremely different. Minimum standards can be respected- but I'd quickly lose my job if I expected the same results from a rich vacationer from Europe as I expected and got from kiwis who I trained locally in local lakes and the South Pacific.

As the Japanese say: the nail that sticks up, gets hammered down and this is very true teaching in vacation DC's.

 

[Peter Guy]

Just a passing comment to the mods -- should most of this discussion, as interesting as it has been, be moved over to the I-to-I forum? I wonder if it is appropriate for "Basic Scuba."

 

[Thalassamania]

Err... who said anything about not respecting standards?

I stand by my point that vacation divers/students are treated differently than locals. I'm not saying that I agree with it- but in my experience in local shops in NZ, vs. backpacker shops in Phils, Malaysia and Thailand, vs. flashpacker hotels in Egypt, vs. military training in Djibouti, vs. 5* in the Maldives, the training is different and the attitude of the trainee is extremely different. Minimum standards can be respected- but I'd quickly lose my job if I expected the same results from a rich vacationer from Europe as I expected and got from kiwis who I trained locally in local lakes and the South Pacific.

As the Japanese say: the nail that sticks up, gets hammered down and this is very true teaching in vacation DC's.

What you are describing is against PADI standards (at least as I understand them). On one side it would be against standards to certify a student, no matter rich a vacationer, who failed to master the requisite skills, yet, on the other hand it would be against standards to demand more of a "backpacker" than the standards specify. You can't have it both ways.

 

[dbulmer]

Just a passing comment to the mods -- should most of this discussion, as interesting as it has been, be moved over to the I-to-I forum? I wonder if it is appropriate for "Basic Scuba."

I disagree.

Please note: This forum has special rules. This forum is intended to be a very friendly, "flame free zone" where divers of any skill level may ask questions about basic scuba topics without fear of being accosted. Please show respect and courtesy at all times. Remember that the inquirer is looking for answers that they can understand. This is a learning zone and consequently, any off-topic or overly harsh responses will be removed.

There are 2 sides to instruction - those instructing and those being trained. As a trainee I find the discussion interesting.

 

[drrich2]

Then they should fail the course, what's so hard about that?

Thal., I believe his point (which you may well already know, and just dispute how he acts on it) is that if a vacation resort dive shop has an OW Instructor who fails a number of their lackluster but wealthy, influential (at least with the resort's management) and accustomed to being pandered to, that Instructor is going to change his ways or be fired and replaced with one who will, and that either way those 'soft on training' certifications will consider.

Many people on the forum will believe the Instructor should refuse to compromise training standards (& his principles). Many people in the 'working world' would question whether he should compromise his ability to pay the mortgage payment and grocery bill by leaving a job when the problem of ill-trained certifications will continue with or without him.

The other possibility, as I see it, is that for similar reasons it's harder to press these more 'powerful' clients to substantially exceed minimum standards, or demonstrate true mastery of a skill rather than just do it once 'more or less,' as opposed to less influential students.

Ironically, it's the less influential students who probably get better training and start out better divers.

I hope I didn't twist or misrepresent anybody's ideas. I don't care to weigh in on what he should do, either. Just trying to clarify the issue.

Richard.