Posted by MHK on June 20, 2001 at 11:24:52:
In Reply to: A sincere question posted by brianc on June 20, 2001 at 11:06:03:
I don't view this as an opportunity to throw fuel on the fire at all, I think you raise some valid points and some valid issues...
If I were teaching open water I would NEVER teach PADI and my reasoning is as follows:
PADI requires that you stay within the limited criteria that they have set. They do so that in the [unlikely ;-)] event of an accident the victim puts the PADI system on trial and not the individual instructor.. As such, the instructor is precluded from any deviation. I, in no way, shape or form believe that the current PADI system qualifies divers to dive so I would, by definition, deviate from the system..
So choice one would be to avoid PADI and I would spend a great deal more time that is currently alloted for pool work. I'm happy with the ratio's that you cite and as you may imagine I agree that priority is number one.. That being said, I don't believe that everyone is meant to be a scuba diver and I would balance the need for the instructor to go that extra mile to help someone who in their judgement had what it took -v- the notion of *everyone can dive* so pass them anyway and then sell them some added classes later..
Again, to speak to your question about entry level students, my sense is that there is too much attention paid to *positive reinforcement* which allows for a more lackadasical attitue and approach. I would remind and emphasis, not avoid, talking about fatalities in class. If I were teaching a class this weekend I would tell everyone before they paid me a penny that in SoCal we lost 16 divers in 16 months.. I would want them to know that training is important and if they walked into my class talking to me about some video or cd-rom that they watched I'd tell them to take up cooking and not scuba diving...
As for the short term solution, it would seem clear to me that in the examples that you cite your #1 priority would be to handle the emergency, get the student in control and then the entire dive would get aborted [assuming in your judgement that the situation warranted it] it's easier to deal with a problem at the surface then it is at 30'.. I would take my students no deeper than 20' or 30' because if they can get the bouyancy down at 20' or 30' then 40' -60' is a slam dunk, furthermore, while possible, it's less likely someone will embolize from 20' if they bolt..
Once at the surface I would have the DM escort the diver to the beach/boat while the instructor stayed with the class at the surface. Once I was comfortable they were on the boat I would continue the class.. At the de-brief I would discuss his issues with everyone and explain what, why and what to avoid.. I would NOT reduce the skill level of the other students to accomodate the weakest link.. I would fail way more students then are currently getting C-cards that last for life..
By the same token, recognizing that some do this for a living, I would offer the failed student a free spot in my next open water class, conditioned upon room in the class and conditioned upon him/her doing added pool work.. If they are unwilling to put in the extra effort than the instructor shouldn't be required to do it either and then I would suggest they take up golf..
I don't believe that everyone should dive, but by the same token I don't believe that every student that has problems in OW should be precluded.. I would just have an altered balance from what I see today...
Hope that answers your questions, if not fire away...
Later