When is a skill "mastered"?

[boulderjohn]

Re-reading the 'Early Transition to Neutral Buoyancy' article, it appears that PADI is recommending a 'fin pivot' position while introducing skills.

"These instructors have students neutrally buoyant from the beginning, even in the first confined water dive, with their legs resting lightly on the floor of the pool. They are in a position similar to a fin pivot, with their upper bodies supported by the air in their BCDs."

snip/

"One misconception many people have when first hearing of this approach is that it requires students to perform skills while in a full hover throughout the training.

As stated earlier, that’s not correct. It’s not reasonable to expect the students to have
mastered neutral trim at the early learning stages. Students are generally in light contact with the pool bottom while doing most skills."

So this article says that a fin-pivot position is OK (instead of sitting or kneeling. However it is not yet backed up as a STANDARD ​which continues to use words such as sitting or kneeling. I hope this is rectified soon to remove any doubt.

I just sent an email to PADI: training.emea@padi.com

I will be happy to expand on what I meant when I wrote those words you quoted. Just ask for more specifics if you would like them.

There is not a single word in the standards that says anything about kneeling or sitting. Those words are in a training guideline that suggests methodology.

I had a brief email exchange with Karl Shreeves of PADI last night. He had some advice for instructors reading this thread who might be confused. He said such instructors should refer to "the Uj article and to check with an Ed consultant rather than accept the opinion on a forum." He also said "Somethings take awhile to sink in, but no doubt they will."

 

[DevonDiver]

He also said "Somethings take awhile to sink in, but no doubt they will."

They'd sink in quicker if done properly and written into standards in the Instructor Manual back in 2011...

Frankly, I wouldn't risk my liability over someone's word in a phone call, especially when it directly disagreed with a formal, written standard. I have absolutely zero faith that PADI would back an instructor if an incident happened because of this. They'd refer to standards and cite non-compliance...

A cynic might be given leave to think that PADI had deliberately left the 'change' out of formal standards.... because it didn't comply with some potentially litigation risk... Thus, make a change, shield the organization.... leave the instructors to carry the can..

"It's a standard, but not one we've been willing to put in writing"

"Please ignore our previous advice, please ignore what we wrote.... just do it another way... it'll be fine... honest"

As previously demonstrated - introducing neutral buoyancy prior to OW#3 isn't 'ambiguous'... it's clearly and demonstrably against PADI standards.

Perhaps you can invite Karl to come and address this thread personally - to state publicly and officially in writing what PADI's position is....

 

[boulderjohn]

Just to repeat for instructors out there who are confused....

You can contact PADI and get the truth in writing or by phone, whichever you prefer. It only takes a couple of minutes.

or

You can take the word of a person whose hatred of PADI has manifested itself quite thoroughly in a number of threads over the past year.

Your choice.

 

[DCBC]

Perhaps you can invite Karl to come and address this thread personally - to state publicly and officially in writing what PADI's position is....

Actually, it doesn't matter what Karl says; unless it's reflected in the Standards it's nothing more than opinion. I'm sure PADI's Legal Department might want to speak with Karl about any written statement he makes...

Members of PADI's Legal Team are retained to represent the needs of PADI and its parent company, not the Instructor. This is why the Instructor carries personal liability insurance. During litigation where an Instructor finds himself in the position of being a Defendant, the only thing that's important is that s/he acted in a reasonable manner. Factors affecting this include, but are not limited to the Standards of the certification organization (in this case PADI), and if the action/inaction taken by the Defendant were reasonable under the circumstances. PADI may also be named within the lawsuit, but their Standard of Care is different than that of the Instructor.

Karl's position is as a writer, instructional designer and photographer for PADI. He has no authority to change PADI policy.

 

[DevonDiver]

To whom are you referring?

There has been no spite for PADI in my thread. Unlike some, I've quoted the correct materials and referenced proper sources. I've merely quantified an 'official' position, as expressed in writing by an organization in a diverse range of it's formal directive training materials. I have not passed judgement on that - it is merely an explanation of how PADI define mastery and, in particular, that their standards do not encompass any support for instructors adding, subtracting or amending skills or assessments as they are defined in their formal standards.

I've also been very vociferous to defend PADI, when I have felt misinformation was being communicated about them. It is misinformation that I dislike. There has been a lot of misinformation in this thread - it is apparent through the lack of any substantiation.

I'm sorry John, but your 'phone a friend' theory doesn't cut the mustard when that organisation produces annual instructor manuals and quarterly standards updates - and no such communication of a standards change has been communicated for 2 years since the issue was first raised informally in an article.

Your 'interpretation' is that PADI are willing to waive formal standards by phone, but unwilling to publish the same standards changes in any document for which they would be accountable. I ask why that would be?

I have suggested that you offer some incontrovertible evidence to support any of the claims you've made.... you could not, as there is none.

I have suggested that you invite your PADI contact to resolve this issue directly on the forum... you have resorted to insults and character slurs. That's quite feeble.

---------- Post added June 1st, 2013 at 11:01 PM ----------

Karl's position is as a writer, instructional designer and photographer for PADI. He has no authority to change PADI policy.

And... I assume, no authorization to communicate policy changes that do not exist, nor have been communicated via the sanctioned, official means.

John seems to believe I have no contact with PADI... or do not contact PADI. I do. The last occasion I contacted PADI about a standards issue was in relation to sidemount/technical courses. I was given an immediate answer on forthcoming changes. I was also given a reference - those changes were being announced in the next Training Bulletin. Low-and-behold... several months later there they were in writing.. BIG and BOLD. At that point, I instituted the appropriate changes. It was all above-board and the advice I was given on a standards issue was duly publicized in the sanctioned standards update medium...

 

[DCBC]

Just to repeat for instructors out there who are confused....

You can contact PADI and get the truth in writing or by phone, whichever you prefer. It only takes a couple of minutes.

or

You can take the word of a person whose hatred of PADI has manifested itself quite thoroughly in a number of threads over the past year.

Your choice.

John, I know that you are better than this drivel. Andy has provided documentary proof which is more than his opinion. You can direct a personal concern about a certification Agency without hating it (although dislike can spring from a bad experience). In this case, it's substantiated and someone who doesn't share the same opinion doesn't negate it by throwing stones.

In-turn, you have defended your position by:

1/ Referring to an article in the UJ (one Author's opinion); and

2/ Speaking to an employee at PADI HQ.

Do you really feel that this is enough to overturn what Andy has presented? Would you feel comfortable in Civil Court if one of your student's died during an exercise that wasn't specifically outlined in the Standards; especially when the Standards state that you can't deviate from the program? An Expert Witness from PADI would likely be in attendance to outline PADI's written Standards in great detail and reflect their opinion as to if they were followed to the letter.You in-turn would justify your actions based upon an article you read and a telephone conversation??? If so, may the Court be kind to you...

 

[Peter Guy]

OK -- is there ANYTHING in this upon which all PADI instructors may agree?

How about let's try creating a list:

a. An instructor must teach within and to PADI Standards. Agree/Disagree

b. How a particular skill is to be taught or evaluated is NOT defined by PADI Standards with perhaps the exception of the CESA. Agree/Disagree

c. PADI Standards are written in the PADI Instructor Manual. Agree/Disagree

d. The PADI Guide to Teaching are suggestions for how to teach. Agree/Disagree

e. Drew Richardson's "PADI Is Flexible" article from 1993 is a mandatory article within the PADI Instructor Development Course. Agree/Disagree

f. "Deviating from Standards" is an undefined term. Agree/Disagree

g. "In a manner expected of a diver at that level of certification" has no objective meaning. Agree/Disagree

 

[DevonDiver]

a. An instructor must teach within and to PADI Standards. Agree/Disagree

Agree.

b. How a particular skill is to be taught or evaluated is NOT defined by PADI Standards with perhaps the exception of the CESA. Agree/Disagree

Disagree.

1) Standards to stipulate the sequencing of skills, in particular that skills must not be transferred between modules (i.e. CW#4 to CW#1).

2) Standards stipulate that assessment/evaluation must adhere strictly to performance standards, which are stated, plainly, categorically and unequivocally for each specific skill.

c. PADI Standards are written in the PADI Instructor Manual. Agree/Disagree

Agree.... and the quarterly Training Bulletin (featured within the Undersea Journal, but not comprising the Undersea Journal).

d. The PADI Guide to Teaching are suggestions for how to teach. Agree/Disagree

Agreed.

The caveat is that:

"The PADI System’s hardware (educational and instructional materials) and its software (standards and procedures) help you ensure that student divers achieve the intended learning outcomes". Course Director Manual 2007, Instructor Development Course Curriculum, 'Learning, Instruction and the PADI System'.

"For risk management purposes, it’s important to use the system as prescribed. Deviating from a proven system will cause you to have to defend your actions and establish yourself as an instructional design authority". Course Director Manual 2007, Instructor Development Course Curriculum, 'Learning, Instruction and the PADI System'.

"Instructional systems ensure that all course material and important objectives are covered in a proper sequence". Course Director Manual 2007, Instructor Development Course Curriculum, 'Learning, Instruction and the PADI System'.

"What do you do if you have a question about standards and procedures and their application to teaching situations?
....
3. Look in your PADI’s Guide to Teaching for more detailed explanation of teaching techniques and approaches to different situations."
Course Director Manual 2007, Instructor Development Course Curriculum, 'General Standards and Procedures'.

As the 'Guide To Teaching' is a mandatory material used to train PADI instructors, one might consider it to be an integral part of the 'PADI System'. It also fulfills, along with varied manuals and videos, a 'role-model' function for PADI instructors to follow.

It is referred to as an 'explanation of teaching techniques and approaches..." 'Detailed explanation' differs from 'recommendation', I believe.

Whilst not a 'Standard', it is referenced throughout instructor training and recommended for subsequent review should a PADI Instructor require guidance on "how to perform skills". It is debatable that not following that 'system as prescribed', might open the instructor to having to "defend their actions and establish themselves as an instructional design authority".

In the case of CW Modules 1-2, the 'Guide To Teaching' makes specific reference to teaching certain skills whilst "kneeling or seated". This falls into line with the STANDARDS requirement that neutral buoyancy is not taught or assessed until CW#3.




e. Drew Richardson's "PADI Is Flexible" article from 1993 is a mandatory article within the PADI Instructor Development Course. Agree/Disagree

Unsure. It isn't a required material for IDC candidates. It may however feature as a reference within CD presentations. There is no direct reference to it in the 2010 Course Director manual.

Course Director Manual 2010, Instructor Development Course Standards:

Instructor Candidate Materials
Required
The PADI Dive Center, Resort, Course Director and/or IDC Staff Instructor conducting the course ensures that instructor candidates have, in their possession, a personal, current set of the following materials for study and use during the course and for reference afterward; unless the materials are not available in a language understood by the candidate:
• PADI Instructor Manual
• PADI’s Guide to Teaching
• PADI Specialty Course Instructor Manual, or these specialty course instructor guides: Peak Performance Buoyancy, Project AWARE and AWARE – Coral Reef Conservation
• PADI Open Water Diver Manual
• Recreational Dive Planner – RDP Table and eRDPML, including Instructions for Use booklets
• How to Use and Choose Dive Computers book
• Open Water Diver Quizzes and Exam booklet
• Adventures in Diving Manual
• PADI Rescue Diver Manual
• Rescue Diver Final Exams booklet
• PADI Divemaster Manual
• Divemaster Final Exams booklet
• Aquatic Cue Cards for Open Water Diver, Adventures in Diving, Rescue Diver, Divemaster and Discover Scuba Diving
• Confined Water Lesson Preparation slate
• Open Water Training Dive Lesson Planning slate
• The Encyclopedia of Recreational Diving
• Diving Knowledge Workbook or eRecord for Dive Theory Online

f. "Deviating from Standards" is an undefined term. Agree/Disagree

Agreed. No specific definition is given for the term "Deviating from Standards". Although previous references have been given where PADI basically stated 'amending, retracting, substituting, lower or higher' from the applicable standard was not permitted.

However, instructors are repeatedly informed that the applicable Standards and Procedures, are "published in the PADI, DSAT and EFR Instructor Manuals, and, if applicable, the PADI Course Director Manual and EFR Instructor Trainer Manual, and will...standards changes published in the Training Bulletin and other updates".

"Put the safety of diving clients and students as your first priority and responsibility. In doing so, abide by the requirements and intent of PADI Standards and Procedures in the PADI Instructor Manual, PADI’s Guide to Teaching, Training Bulletin and other updates while applying your best judgment during the PADI courses and programs you conduct".
PADI Member Code of Practice.

The nearest direct reference I could find is:

Applying Standards and Procedures
A. Where do you find and how do you apply general standards and procedures to teaching situations?
[NOTE: Have candidates answer the following questions using the PADI Instructor Manual – General Standards and Procedures Guide.]


That refers to conducting an exercise, during which the instructor is asked standards questions and seeks appropriate answers within the PADI Instructor Manual, General Standards and Procedures Guide. This same exercise is replicated through the Instructor Examination 'Standards Exam' - again, where candidate instructors have to reference the PADI Instructor Manual, General Standards and Procedures and/or Course Instructor Manuals to find a definitive Standard to meet a variety of scenarios.

It seems that PADI do not feel the need to provide a 'definition' of that exact phrase. Perhaps they feel that identifying the location of the standards, combined with an assumption that people understand the word 'deviate' is sufficient?

de·vi·ate Verb
Depart from an established course.
Depart from usual or accepted standards.


g. "In a manner expected of a diver at that level of certification" has no objective meaning. Agree/Disagree

Agreed.

There is a definition and goal given for the outcome of every certification level. There is no goal given for varied 'stages' of the certification process.

In the absence of one, and the existence of the other - I would say that "the manner expected of a diver at that level of certification" has to apply to the specific performance standards of a specific skill, to a level of that course outcome.

Note: It applies to performance standards i.e. "1. Perform the buddy predive safety check". There is no wider context given by any definition or standard of 'overall' diver competency. Performance standards are only given in relation to specific skills.

The latest PADI Instructor Manual (2013) has removed reference that defines what an Open Water Diver is.

 

[The Chairman]

This discussion has devolved to Andy straining the gnat but swallowing a camel. Bringing Andy's logic to its fallacious conclusion, the student is not allow to even touch their BC inflator/deflator until dive 3. How will they descend? Better smack that hand before it touches a button and you get sued. In the real world we call that being anal retentive.

 

[Edward3c]

...
e. Drew Richardson's "PADI Is Flexible" article from 1993 is a mandatory article within the PADI Instructor Development Course. Agree/Disagree
...

PADI has been sold a number of times since that article. As a consequence the current owners have no obligation to follow or honour it.