What training agency

[oahu_diver]

I thought AAUS standards requires the DSO to be an active instructor. Is this not the case?

 

[Thalassamania]

AAUS standards are not really standards, since they provide for no form of enforcement or sanction. They are more of a model than a requirement. The critical piece is that the institution be able to use the OSHA exemption to the commercial diving standards, which does not require AAUS membership or total compliance. What is required is:

1. The Diving Control Board consists of a majority of active scientific divers and has autonomous and absolute authority over the scientific diving program's operations.

2. The purpose of the project using scientific diving is the advancement of science; therefore, information and data resulting from the project are non-proprietary.

3. The tasks of a scientific diver are those of an observer and data gatherer. Construction and trouble-shooting tasks traditionally associated with commercial diving are not included within scientific diving.

4. Scientific divers, based on the nature of their activities, must use scientific expertise in studying the underwater environment and, therefore, are scientists or scientists in training.


We fought long and hard to get out from under the commercial standard. It took ten years out of many of our lives, and cost well over $10 million dollars (that could have gone into doing underwater science). Critical in this process was being able to define our community and to clearly state it's safety record. Were we saddled with the safety record of either commercial divers or recreational divers or instructors we never would have been able to successfully make our case. I think it is the height of folly to look to another (and more problematically risk prone) community for the credentialing of our community's key personnel.

The current model manual states: The Diving Safety Officer (DSO) serves as a member of the Diving Control Board (DCB).

This person should have broad technical and scientific expertise in research related diving.
a) Qualifications
1. Shall be appointed by the responsible administrative officer or designee, with the
advice and counsel of the Diving Control Board.
2. Shall be trained as a scientific diver.
3. Shall be a full member as defined by AAUS.
4. Shall be an active underwater instructor from a internationally recognized
certifying agency.

I can not imagine that AAUS would refuse membership to an institution that dropped item a)4) from it's institutional manual. It is interesting to note, that if you want to take a strict reading, the only "internationally recognized certifying agency," (e.g., recognized by a number of different governments) is CMAS.

 

[oahu_diver]

MY UNDERSTANDING: The AAUS manual is the minimum standards. Institutions can add to it, but can not subtract from it. I would think that AAUS would refuse membership to any institution that dropped any of it's requirements because then they would not be satisfying the minimum requirements. I can not see AAUS approving a DSO who is not an active instructor if that is included in the minimum requirements. Of course, now the definition of "active" comes in to play. I interpret it as "active teaching status"...but someone else could interpret it another way.

MY OPINION: There are other agencies that are internationally recognized. It is my understanding that NAUI and PADI are recognized world-wide.

I could be totally wrong...but these are my understandings and opinions.

 

[Thalassamania]

MY UNDERSTANDING: The AAUS manual is the minimum standards.

As a founding officer, one of the manual's authors, a life-time member and a DSO, I would respectfully disagree.

Institutions can add to it, but can not subtract from it.

As a founding officer, one of the manual's authors, a life-time member and a DSO, I would respectfully disagree.

I would think that AAUS would refuse membership to any institution that dropped any of it's requirements because then they would not be satisfying the minimum requirements.

I hate to think that might be the case, the entire concept of AAUS is that the institution is sovereign, not an "agency." AAUS was founded to be the caretaker of a consensual standard, not the enforcer of a coercive one. I hate to think that the recreational agency model has spread that far.

I can not see AAUS approving a DSO who is not an active instructor if that is included in the minimum requirements. Of course, now the definition of "active" comes in to play. I interpret it as "active teaching status"...but someone else could interpret it another way.

AAUS gets no say in whom an institution hires as DSO, remember ... the institution is sovereign. I can not see how completing a recreational instructor program, especially one of the current ones, would enhance the abilities of a DSO one wit. It was somewhat different back when the first manual was written and almost all the authors were NAUI Course Directors and/or board members.

MY OPINION: There are other agencies that are internationally recognized. It is my understanding that NAUI and PADI are recognized world-wide.

Recognized by who? The diver on the street. I read that to mean officially recognized by "most" governments and intergovernmental organizations. That's CMAS and CMAS only.

I could be totally wrong...but these are my understandings and opinions.

It is an ill defined area that is open to interpretation and such. I'm just telling you what the founders (of whom I was one) intent was, there is no gun to your head forcing you to agree, but I'd suggest that if you are to make your case you need to talk to the folks who were there: Stewart, Austin, Sharkey, Bell, Heinmiller, Duffy, Lang, Mitchell, Somers, Egstrom, Given (deceased), Richardson (not the PADI one), Owen, Erickson, Flahan, Demico, and a few others who I do not mean to overlook, but it has been thirty years.

 

[oahu_diver]

My understanding comes from Section 1.10, para. 2 of the current manual:

"This standard sets minimal standards for the establishment of the American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS) recognized scientific diving programs, the organization for the conduct of these programs, and the basic regulations and procedures for safety in scientific diving operations. It also establishes a framework for reciprocity between AAUS organizational members that adhere to these minimum standards."

and para. 5

"Additional standards that extend this document may be adopted by each organizational member, according to local procedure."

I'm just trying to get a better understanding of this. There are training standards...and who better to conduct that training than a dive instructor? Are you saying that an institution can hire a person with a scientific diver card from another institution and that person can be the DSO and certify future scientific divers?

I agree that a recreational dive instructor does not necessarily have the scientific expertise to be a DSO. I would hope that the instructor rating is just a small part of the credentials and that further training was received to be a quality DSO.

BTW...thanks for indulging me in this conversation. This is very helpful to my understanding.

 

[Thalassamania]

My understanding comes from Section 1.10, para. 2 of the current manual:

"This standard sets minimal standards for the establishment of the American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS) recognized scientific diving programs, the organization for the conduct of these programs, and the basic regulations and procedures for safety in scientific diving operations. It also establishes a framework for reciprocity between AAUS organizational members that adhere to these minimum standards."

and para. 5

"Additional standards that extend this document may be adopted by each organizational member, according to local procedure."

I would argue that it would be best if AAUS stayed out of the hiring procedures of member institutions.

I'm just trying to get a better understanding of this. There are training standards...and who better to conduct that training than a dive instructor?

Becoming a recreational diving instructor in no way prepares someone to teach a Scripps Model 100 hour course. The typical approach of recreational instructors, when faced with the need to meet the rather amorphous AAUS training spec is to cram a series of courses (typically O/W, AOW, and some specialty courses together to meet the 100 hour 12 dive requirement and call that a course. If that is permitted to be the up can coming model you can kiss our safety record and ultimately our OSHA exemption goodby.

Are you saying that an institution can hire a person with a scientific diver card from another institution and that person can be the DSO and certify future scientific divers?

From my experience, I would expect that person to do a much better job than someone whose only credential is a recreational diving instructor certificate.

I agree that a recreational dive instructor does not necessarily have the scientific expertise to be a DSO. I would hope that the instructor rating is just a small part of the credentials and that further training was received to be a quality DSO.

BTW...thanks for indulging me in this conversation. This is very helpful to my understanding.

I simply do not see what skills are gained becoming one of today's recreational diving instructors that will make you a better DSO and I can see lots of things that would need to be unlearned (e.g., fear of teaching buoyant ascents). I can also see many situations in which excellent DSO candidates would be passed over for the lack of a recreational diving instructor certificate. I had many sterling individuals who taught in my program and worked their way up to Senior Team Leader (think of that as the highest level of instructor) but who possessed no recreational leadership credential nor desired said same. Not only were they first class instructors, they were working scientists and proven administrators, just what the PhD ordered.

There is also the issue of who is in charge, the minute you give the recreational training agencies any power over your personnel decisions you loose authority over your programs. It is, in my mind, akin to permitting the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association to sit at the selection table for candidates to the U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School.

I'm sure that you will find AAUS members (and even officials) who will agree and disagree with me, but I'm fairly confident that the founders would be unanimous, they never expected recreational diver training to become what it has.

Sorry, I did not mean to hijack this way ... if you want to call a Mod to split it off, that'd be fine.

 

[oahu_diver]

So, in your view, how would one become a DSO, if they are not an active instructor as required by the AAUS manual?

 

[Thalassamania]

Attend an institution with an active research diver training program, get a science degree, engage in underwater research, work your way up through the training staff, take some management and public administration courses.

 

[rhwestfall]

another one for YMCA. And you are missing PDIC....

 

[Insta-Gator]

Started with NASDS for OW.
LDS is now SSI for AOW

But I've become very annoyed with the LDS this year so I will probably switch to PADI for any additional training.