Your favorite certification agency ...

[MXGratefulDiver]

You know, Steve, I like and respect you . . . but I think there is more to some folks' adoption of GUE as a certifying agency than being a joiner, or wanting to be part of a club. Although, in fact, being part of the community, and the advantages that come with that, IS one of the attractions. Still, the organization of the curriculum, the openness of the standards and evaluation criteria, the 100% QA, and the consistency of the teaching from one instructor and course to another are very real assets. That last one, in particular, can be difficult to ensure with other agencies.

Which works exceptionally well for people with certain goals and personalities. But those same advantages can present drawbacks for people with other personalities and goals. Mr. Black pointed out some that I particularly identify with ... the desire to dive certain configurations that are frowned on by the GUE community and the fact that I really enjoy solo diving. By definition, that makes people like me incompatible with GUE.

For the vacation diver, having to re-invest in specific equipment because it's mandated is a barrier. Why ditch perfectly functional equipment that works for you unless it's because that equipment is holding you back from achieving what you want to achieve?

It's a mixed bag. Ironically, nobody I know within the GUE organization ever attempts to paint GUE as the end-all/be-all of diving. It's those who find what they're looking for within the GUE system ... and assume that what they see as inherent benefits will be, or should be, viewed that way by everyone else.

There are many things I highly regard about the GUE approach. There are others that drive me nuts. For me it's a matter of personality and goals more than specific skill sets. I don't dive to be perfect, I dive to relax. I found that beyond the basic skills taught in Fundamentals, higher level GUE classes would not help me achieve my goals ... and in some respects they would hold me back. There were other classes and other agencies out there that offered classes much closer to what I wanted.

Viva le difference. It works wonderfully for some people, and among my students a fairly high percentage of them go on to take follow-on GUE classes, and get a lot of benefit from them. Others certainly would not.

As for part of being a community ... well, we both know what happened the last time I tried becoming part of our local GUE community. It's the only time in the 13 years I've been diving that I was outright told I wasn't welcome. Yes, there's different folks running the club these days, but that's not an experience I care to expose myself to again ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[boulderjohn]

I think that agencies determine a whole lot of the curriculum so much so that it is a given that what you learn is largely determined by the course structure laid down by the agency.

E.g. from my very limited experience:

So you are comparing your experience the basic PADI OW course to your experience a more advanced UTD course and finding some differences. What a surprise! In case you want to compare the basic PADI OW course you took to the basic UTD OW class, you will find the UTD course requirements in pages 35-36 of this document.

But even then, your experience may not reflect actual requirements:

Air sharing
PADI - Pass octo to your buddy. Drill ends there.
UTD - Full S Drill + Ascent with all stops. Swimming with donated hose, buddy on left, buddy on right, buddy in front.

Please report this to PADI--this is a standards violation. In the pool sessions, you should have swum underwater sharing air with your buddy for a full minute. In the open water, you should have done an ascent while sharing air. In the new PADI standards, there is also an ascent in the pool session.

SMB Deployment
PADI - Cursory demonstration. Only one person in my class got to actually try it in the water. After that, has no memory of how to do it. I never got to touch the SMB in water.
UTD - Drills on SMB deployment on land. Detailed instructions on where to hold reel, how to setup, etc. SMB deployment drills in pool. SMB Deployment at depth in the sea.

SMB deployment is not part of the UTD OW class. It was not part of the PADI course either, so you got a bonus. It is part of the new PADI standards to be implemented next year.

Toxing buddy rescue
PADI - No training at OW and AOW level
UTD - Training on buddy rescue at OW level

There is no toxing diver taught at the OW level in either class. It is in the instructional materials for the PADI nitrox class.

Propulsion methods
PADI - Only taught big flutter kicks
UTD - Frog, modified frog, helicopter, back kick

Only one non-silting kick is required by UTD at the OW level.

Dive planning
PADI - Taught to use tables / calculator to determine SI and pressure groups. This was in theory only, we never did this in practice, and none of the PADI trained divers I know even remember how to use the calculator thinggy 6 months after getting the C card. I found out as I was trying to verify something and asked around, as I have also forgotten how to use it.

Once again, get back to PADI about this standards violation. You were supposed to use it on every training dive.

Big, big difference in how training is conducted across different agencies. From what I learned talking to GUE instructors, Fundies is even more stringent, and requirements even higher.

I have taken a lot of courses from a lot of agencies, and I generally find that even within an agency, when you compare a more advanced course to a beginning course, you will find that the more advanced course has more advanced skills in it.

In addition, individual instructors in any agency can choose to add more instruction beyond what is required in any course; that is why an individual's personal experience may not match another individual's personal experience.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

Toxing buddy rescue
PADI - No training at OW and AOW level
UTD - Training on buddy rescue at OW level

Toxing diver rescue is a curious skill to be teaching at the OW level. Granted that basic rescue skills are invaluable at any level, but a toxing diver implies that you are breating elevated levels of O2 beyond the tolerance level of your body ... and if you're doing that you're diving pretty far beyond the OW level.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[WhiteSands]

So you are comparing your experience the basic PADI OW course to your experience a more advanced UTD course and finding some differences. What a surprise! In case you want to compare the basic PADI OW course you took to the basic UTD OW class, you will find the UTD course requirements in pages 35-36 of this document.

But even then, your experience may not reflect actual requirements:



Please report this to PADI--this is a standards violation. In the pool sessions, you should have swum underwater sharing air with your buddy for a full minute. In the open water, you should have done an ascent while sharing air. In the new PADI standards, there is also an ascent in the pool session.

SMB deployment is not part of the UTD OW class. It was not part of the PADI course either, so you got a bonus. It is part of the new PADI standards to be implemented next year.

There is no toxing diver taught at the OW level in either class. It is in the instructional materials for the PADI nitrox class.

Only one non-silting kick is required by UTD at the OW level.


Once again, get back to PADI about this standards violation. You were supposed to use it on every training dive.

I have taken a lot of courses from a lot of agencies, and I generally find that even within an agency, when you compare a more advanced course to a beginning course, you will find that the more advanced course has more advanced skills in it.

In addition, individual instructors in any agency can choose to add more instruction beyond what is required in any course; that is why an individual's personal experience may not match another individual's personal experience.

I was comparing PADI AOW to UTD Rec 2 (inclusive of the lower level classes) classes. Both allow the learner to dive to 30m except Rec 2 also certifies the diver to Nitrox.

For toxing diver rescue, I had the impression it was taught at OW as there is a Vimeo video of the course snippets that showed it. I might be wrong as my OW was from PADI. I know for certain it is a graded requirement at Essentials of Rec level.

As for reporting my PADI nstructor, its something easier said then done due to the emotional connection and friendship developed with the instructor over the course. It should be stated clearly in the course requirements and make it a requirement for students to review courses anonymously online or something.

i thought PADI nitrox is an online theory only class. How do you teach diver rescue in a theory class??

 

[boulderjohn]

I was comparing PADI AOW to UTD Rec 2 classes. Both allow the learner to dive to 30m except Rec 2 also certifies the diver to Nitrox.

OK, so you still compared a course from one agency with a different class from another agency. How can one draw any conclusions from this?

 

[WhiteSands]

OK, so you still compared a course from one agency with a different class from another agency. How can one draw any conclusions from this?

So what would be a fairer comparison in your opinion? Perhaps PADI AOW + Nitrox?

 

[boulderjohn]

So what would be a fairer comparison in your opinion? Perhaps PADI AOW + Nitrox?

Different courses from different agencies will have different requirements. The PADI recreational program has OW, AOW, and Rescue, along with a bunch of specialties. The PADI AOW course has a number of optins for the diver, so two courses with two students might have only a 40% overlap.

As the UTD recreational diver looks at the options, they will see:

1. Open Water Diver
2. Recreational Diver !
3. Recreational Diver 2
4. Recreational Diver 3
5. Rescue and Emergency Procedures
6. Essentials of Recreational Diving

They also have plenty of specialty classes.

There is no way you can compare any two classes and expect them to have exactly the same curricula.

BTW, I have a pile of UTD certifications, so I do have a clue about this.

 

[The Chairman]

The premise between a UTD class and a PADI class are different. It's like trying to contrast the difference between architects and engineers. The former know a little about everything and the latter know everything about a little. Which is better depends entirely on your outlook. In the same way, choose the agency that closest aligns to your approach and thinking. Isn't that what this thread is all about? There's no need to try and convert someone over to your way of thinking. Dive and let dive.

 

[Diver0001]

I want to direct this question to students as well as instructors and dive masters.

Which certification agency do you prefer and why? I was reading through the websites of various agencies and I was particularly impressed by PSAI and UTD. UTD because of the way they structured dive training. Instead of doing OW followed by a specialty sampler, UTD had Rec 1, Rec 2, and Rec 3 which combined a lot of specialties into three different levels. It appeared to be more logical approach towards diver education instead of breaking fundamentals like boat entries, shore entries and buoyancy into "courses" and charging money to give you an AOW card. PSAI because of their Narcossis management courses that are broken down into various depths.

Whats your and why? Thanks.

1) PADI. Because they make good on their mission statement, "the way the world learns to dive". PADI is certainly NOT the best agency (nor is that the goal) in terms of quality but they pretty much single-handedly created diving as we know it. They have trained the vast majority of divers, they have allowed for the development of the vast majority of vacation destinations, they have made diving a world wide hobby for millions of people. Without PADI the entire idea of "recreational" diving would not exist. Without PADI gear would never have developed as it has, the beginnings of agencies like GUE and UTD would never have been possible and we would still all be diving with a knife held between our teeth! All other agencies that call themselves "recreational" are just PADI copies printed on different coloured paper. IDEA, PDIC, SDI, SSI, ACUC and affiliates are to PADI what the cheap PC clones were to the IBM personal computer in the 1980's ... a money-grab based on someone else's product.

NAUI and CMAS seem to superficially still sail their own course, but these too are forced more and more due to PADI's outstanding work, to conform to what PADI thinks recreational training should be. Is this a positive thing? Who knows, but it is a source of endless irritation and the source of most of the PADI bashing on the internet by those who feel that PADI is somehow the "enemy". After all, losers hate winners.

2) GUE. Because they grew from the seed PADI planted but decided to put 100% of their focus on quality. GUE is happy to remain a niche player. They're very expensive, their courses are very challenging and the divers they produce are very good. It's GOOD that our industry has an agency that offers the option to specialize and focus on nothing but perfection! GUE deserves the bragging rights for that. They created it, they own it and they deserve it. ALL of it. As for UTD... meh... it's just GUE with differences in opinion as opposed to differences in goals and/or results.

3) IANTD. I personally think that they strike the middle ground. Technical training with neither "Judge Dredd" nor "Mr. Rogers" as an instructor. IANTD is the middle ground between "too much" and "too little". They teach you what you need to know without telling you "you're not good enough" (when you are) or "you are good enough" (when you're not). To me IANTD is the realist in the group.

R..

 

[FM1520]

I have wondered about this pitfall with UTD as well. In practice, however, I have not encountered any overt sales pitches for their gear during UTD courses. I even did a recreational-level clinic with another student who had a jacket BC, and the instructor was fine with it: no pressure or criticism about his choice of gear.

It seems to me that UTD is very conscious of the potential conflict of interest, and they work hard to cultivate an open and inclusive attitude.

Now with SSI and Mares, who knows? I assume you can be a SSI dive center and not sell Mares gear at all, so would that really be a concern? I still see all brands of gear in the photos on the SSI web site. In fact, I'm hard pressed to find any Mares stuff in their photos. We'll need to start worrying when all we see are Mares logos all over their website and teaching materials.

Similar experience UTD, I have taken classes through Rec 2 and no one has ever said anything about my DSS BP/W nor have they ever tried to fix a skill problem with an equipment purchase. They seem to have a pretty inclusive attitude concentrating on skill more than equipment.