When are you an instructor?

[bsee65]

I've been reading various threads here, many about instructors not following protocols, making mistakes, or otherwise generally putting divers who are relying upon them at an elevated risk. In many of these threads, there are responses that suggest that the instructor only is responsible to follow the protocols in an actual organized class. This really bothers me, and maybe I just don't understand since I've not been through a set of classes.

As an ideal, I would expect an instructor to be following the protocols set forth by their certifying agency at all times as an example of good behavior, if nothing else. Since this clearly isn't practical for everyone, the lesser standard that would make sense to me is that the instructor adhere to the protocols in all situations, class or otherwise, where they are "working". That would include the leading of dives, especially when advertising for the services might include mention of the leader's certification.

Maybe I'm overstepping here, but it seems a theme in many threads that an instructor is only responsible to teach the protocols, and maybe adhere to them while class is in session. That just doesn't make sense to me, or give me the sense that I can really trust that a certified instructor is all about my education and safety as a primary concern.

So, aren't you an instructor and representative of your certifying agency more often than just in organized class?

 

[knotical]

As an instructor, I agree with you, as I think do most instructors. I also think most instructors try to practice what we teach, whether we're "on duty" or not. It's just that the certifying agencies would have a difficult time enforcing training standards when no training is occurring.

I believe what you see in the threads are exceptions, not the rule. Bad news is always more noteworthy than good news.

 

[ScubaSteve]

Are you perhaps mixing up Instructor with DM? I see a ton of threads bashing (rightly or wrongly is irrelevant for this) DM's, but not that many stating Instructors are putting students at unnecessary risk.....or maybe I just have missed a bunch of threads.

 

[rstofer]

Well, I would think an instructor (which I am NOT) would be free to make certain adjustments when not instructing. One of the many things an instructor may choose to do is use a BP/W while teaching the use of a conventional jacket BC. They probably teach the BC because that is what the shop provides. Most instructors around here wear dry suits even though they are teaching wetsuit OW students. So what?

It doesn't mean they are going against standards, it is just different.

What if an instructor really liked vintage equipment. Say they wanted to dive with a double hose regulator and no octo. Are they subject to an automatic flogging because they just want to dive for fun? What if they skip the BC experience and just dive retro? Sounds ok to me!

What about OW instructors that are also tech divers? Are they supposed to stay away from deep or deco dives just because they teach OW? I don't think so.

You need to be specific about just WHICH instructor should be criticized for WHICH procedure violation. As far as I'm concerned, an instructor on holiday is no different than any other diver. Do what you want. Just don't run around advertising that you're an instructor for <insert agency here> and suggesting that what you are doing is mainstream OW.

Richard

 

[Doc]

When are you an instructor?

As soon as you pay your insurance.

 

[rfins]

When I am instructing.....my number one priority is my students......following my agencies standards and procedures.....erroring on the side of safety.

When I dive for pleasure (without students) I may dive a little deeper.....stay a little longer.....use different equipment.......be more relaxed.....but still practice safe diving procedures.
My usual dive buddy and I have hundreds of dives together and we each know the others air consumption rate....capabilities and diving habits. We can dive much more relaxed without the responsiblilties of students to watch out for.
We definitely dive different profiles than we would take students on but we are not reckless...throwing caution to the wind.
To a student our dives may appear dangerous.....Ice diving, Night dives, Wreck dives, Cavern diving,... etc. But we are trained for these dives and would not do any diving that we were not trained for..or comfortable in doing.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

I've been reading various threads here, many about instructors not following protocols, making mistakes, or otherwise generally putting divers who are relying upon them at an elevated risk. In many of these threads, there are responses that suggest that the instructor only is responsible to follow the protocols in an actual organized class. This really bothers me, and maybe I just don't understand since I've not been through a set of classes.

As an ideal, I would expect an instructor to be following the protocols set forth by their certifying agency at all times as an example of good behavior, if nothing else. Since this clearly isn't practical for everyone, the lesser standard that would make sense to me is that the instructor adhere to the protocols in all situations, class or otherwise, where they are "working". That would include the leading of dives, especially when advertising for the services might include mention of the leader's certification.

Maybe I'm overstepping here, but it seems a theme in many threads that an instructor is only responsible to teach the protocols, and maybe adhere to them while class is in session. That just doesn't make sense to me, or give me the sense that I can really trust that a certified instructor is all about my education and safety as a primary concern.

So, aren't you an instructor and representative of your certifying agency more often than just in organized class?

There is a great deal more to diving than you will ever learn in class ... or that I or any other instructor could possibly teach you. Much of it you will learn through mentorship, skills practice, or simply bottom time. As you expand your knowledge and skills you will come to realize that a great deal about diving is situational ... what amounts to the "correct" approach will depend on your skill/experience level, the choice of dive buddies, equipment options, and training level. The more of those components you get, the broader your choices become.

Dive training ... especially at the recreational level ... comprises rules, standards, and protocols that are designed to help you learn in as safe an environment as possible. Adhering to those rules, standards, and protocols in all cases will limit what you can learn, and in some cases will not be the optimal choices for the circumstances you will be diving in. They are optimal for what they are used for, but not for universal application.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[bsee65]

Are you perhaps mixing up Instructor with DM? I see a ton of threads bashing (rightly or wrongly is irrelevant for this) DM's, but not that many stating Instructors are putting students at unnecessary risk.....or maybe I just have missed a bunch of threads.

I may be, especially as an untrained individual, or the poster may be unclear. It seems to me that it is often the case of an instructor acting as DM that creates the issues that bother me. What percentage of instructors also lead dives, if even local club dives out of the shops they are affiliated with? Might they be perceived as DM or assistant DM even if they aren't specifically tagged as such for a particular trip, and that impacts posts that appear here? I would guess that the number is very high, bu I don't know at all. What percentage of commercial DMs are also certified as instructors? I'm thinking this could be a much lower percentage, especially in tourist areas, but again, I don't know at all.

When there is a post, and I've been looking at new stuff as well as some pretty old ones to get a general idea of what's going on, that describes an instructor doing stupid things during a class, the responses generally hold them responsible. No one seems to accept as legitimate an instructor screwing up in a live class with students.

On the other hand, when classes are not in session, the instructor as DM gets a lot of slack. In particular, posts here would suggest that the certifying agencies care very little about what that person does outside of formal class. If a new diver just finished a cert class with some instructor and then signs up to go on a dive with that shop where the instructor is leading, wouldn't that diver expect the instructor acting as DM to still be following protocols? I know I would, though maybe out of ignorance as someone who hasn't been trained. The same would be true of a DM where the advertisements for the dive suggest it is led by a certified instructor, unless the description of the dive specifically requires a certain level of experience or that it will go beyond accepted recreational parameters. This seems to be the gray area.

Sure, an instructor-certified diver off doing their own thing on vacation should be free from responsibility, especially if anonymous. However, if the local dive shop goes on a guided group trip to some exotic location, I might still expect a little more from that instructor as an authority figure, particularly when diving with recent course graduates.

It seems that much of diving safety is about personal responsibility. I get that and wholeheartedly approve. Even so, an authority figure needs to recognize when they might be in a position where others are relying upon that perceived authority and act accordingly. For example, that could mean not descending to 50m, or it could mean explaining that it is inappropriate for a newer diver to go that deep and strongly recommending against following for those who might not have enough experience.

As far as the certification agencies go, shouldn't they be concerned when someone is acting as DM and claiming their instructor certification as part of their qualifications? Doesn't that leave the certification agency open to suit in the event of a mishap? From what I read here, it would suggest they don't care unless it can land on them. That seems mercenary to me, and not in keeping with the level of enthusiasm and respect for the water that the majority here seem to embrace. I expected safety zealots rather than just business people, but maybe that's naive once these organizations grow to a certain size and settle in after enough years.

 

[String]

So, aren't you an instructor and representative of your certifying agency more often than just in organized class?

Nope. There are many agencies with many different standards. Instructors can teach for different agencies and theres no conflict there - they have to obey the agencies standards for the course they are teaching. If they aren't teaching for that agency or are off duty they're just normal divers and can do whatever they want.

 

[Walter]

So, aren't you an instructor and representative of your certifying agency more often than just in organized class?

Excellent question. Often things aren't quite so clear cut. I'll try to explain.

I've been reading various threads here, many about instructors not following protocols, making mistakes, or otherwise generally putting divers who are relying upon them at an elevated risk. In many of these threads, there are responses that suggest that the instructor only is responsible to follow the protocols in an actual organized class.

I believe you are referring to "standards" when you say "protocols." In dive training, "standards" has a very specific meaning. Each agency writes standards that include all the rules an instructor must follow while teaching a particular class. These standards vary greatly from agency to agency and class to class. For example, when teaching an open water class, an instructor would be forbidden to take students into an area that did not allow a direct ascent to the surface. In other words, he can't take them into a wreck or cavern because in such a situation a direct ascent would take them not to the surface, but to steel or rock. An entry into such an area (called an overhead environment) would be a violation of standards. On the other hand, when teaching a wreck or cavern course, there is no prohibition of entering an overhead environment, although there very well may be restrictions as to size or distance from an entrance. Standards, by their very nature, only apply to specific classes. When an instructor is not teaching, training standards (usually just called standards) do not apply.

In your example, you refer to "instructors not following protocols, making mistakes, or otherwise generally putting divers who are relying upon them at an elevated risk." I've read and posted in many such threads. Often people are advised to report the instructor for "violating standards." Unless the action took place during a class, there were no standards to violate.

I do agree with you that certain protocols should be followed even when standards do not apply. In a recent thread, we read the story of an instructor who took a newly certified diver to 50 meters (165 ft). That was not a standards violation because it did not take place during a class. It was a violation of common sense. It was a violation of normal protocols. If there had been a death or injury as a result of such a silly action, in some jurisdictions, the instructor would be open for a great deal of liability. If such actions became known about this instructor, he would probably have a very difficult time finding employment as an instructor.

It seems to me that it is often the case of an instructor acting as DM that creates the issues that bother me.

It bothers me as well. While training standards do not cover not training situations, DMs and Instructors do have a duty and responsibility to divers they are guiding.

What percentage of instructors also lead dives, if even local club dives out of the shops they are affiliated with? Might they be perceived as DM or assistant DM even if they aren't specifically tagged as such for a particular trip, and that impacts posts that appear here?

They certainly are perceived as DMs when they are leading dives and rarely do they discourage such perceptions.

I would guess that the number is very high, bu I don't know at all.

It is pretty high, but I couldn't give you a number.

What percentage of commercial DMs are also certified as instructors? I'm thinking this could be a much lower percentage, especially in tourist areas, but again, I don't know at all.

Actually, that number is very close to 100%.

If a new diver just finished a cert class with some instructor and then signs up to go on a dive with that shop where the instructor is leading, wouldn't that diver expect the instructor acting as DM to still be following protocols?

When we are newly certified, most of us think our instructor is almost godlike. He can do no wrong. As we gain experience, we may discover he can barely dive and can't teach at all. There is a tendancy to trust your instructor. On the other hand, there's lots of responsibilty to go around. If you are taught not to exceed your comfort level, if you are taught to only dive in conditions similar to those in which you've been trained and have experience, you have some knowledge to know what your personal limits might be. You've made four dives, you've never exceeded 60 feet and you are about to dive with your instructor for the first time as a certified diver. You can reasonably expect that your dive will be in conditions similar to your experience. That 60 ft limit is no longer an unbreakable barrier. You might go to 65 or even 70 feet and reasonably believe that you did not violate either of the points you were taught about not exceeding your comfort level or to only dive in conditions similar to those in which you've been trained and have experience. I would agree with you. On the other hand, if your instructor wanted to take you on a dive to 165 feet, you know that is extremely dangerous, you know that exceeds your comfort level, you know those conditions are not similar to your training and experience. You'd have to be as crazy as that idiot instructor of yours to go along with such a dive plan.

It seems that much of diving safety is about personal responsibility. I get that and wholeheartedly approve. Even so, an authority figure needs to recognize when they might be in a position where others are relying upon that perceived authority and act accordingly. For example, that could mean not descending to 50m, or it could mean explaining that it is inappropriate for a newer diver to go that deep and strongly recommending against following for those who might not have enough experience.

I completely agree.

As far as the certification agencies go, shouldn't they be concerned when someone is acting as DM and claiming their instructor certification as part of their qualifications?

They should. I believe some are.

Doesn't that leave the certification agency open to suit in the event of a mishap?

If the instructor wasn't teaching, the agency isn't involved in any way. If the instructor was teaching and violated standards, he was doing something the agency clearly told him not to do and the agency would likely be held blameless. I know as least one agency does not defend their instructors if the accident was the result of a standards violation even if the violation was accidental. If the accident was a result of poor standards, the agency would be an excellent target. I know of some cases like this, but have not heard of the legal outcome.

From what I read here, it would suggest they don't care unless it can land on them. That seems mercenary to me, and not in keeping with the level of enthusiasm and respect for the water that the majority here seem to embrace. I expected safety zealots rather than just business people, but maybe that's naive once these organizations grow to a certain size and settle in after enough years.

At least one agency appears to have that attitude. Some of the others actually care about people more than the bottom line.