New longer DIR-F

[Joe Hesketh]

Not sure whether all this cross posting from Quest is a good idea (?) but for those who haven't seen this...

Quote: (Originally Posted by David Chamberlin on Quest)

The class is increasing in length. The training board hasn't decided
for certain yet exactly how long, though I believe they are nearly
definite on 4 days. However that is the required minimum - there is
nothing precluding doing a longer class. With all of the material that
is in the program now, I don't think it unreasonable to consider a 5-day
class. In fact, that is the format I plan on implementing beginning jan
1 for local classes.

I wrote up a summary of changes in the DIRF program that were covered
during the IE, ITC and workshop. It's been sitting in my "Drafts"
folder while I waited for JJ to approve it. He just sent a message
saying it was OK, so I'm attaching it below. Let me reiterate that
these will not go into effect until the next release of the standards -
which should come in january - thus are not 100% final. Also, there is
an "exemption" for any class that has already been scheduled. i.e., if
you've already scheduled a 3-day DIRF class, an allowance will be made
for that even if it occurs after the new standards go into effect.

-------------


While in FL, we went over some of the changes to the DIRF program.

1) in-water ratios are being reduced from 6:1; they will probably end up
around to 4:1.

2) Class length is being increased, at least to a mandatory 3 days, and
more likely to 4 days.

3) While it's still being debated exactly how to do this, they're
working on a way to address the issue of DIRF students who just want to
stay recreational and those that are using it as a pre-req for
tech/cave. To be qualified to go into a tech/cave class you must
demonstrate a high level of proficiency for each of the skills and must
do it in doubles with a canister light and at least 1 backup light.
Most likely there's going to be a "tech qualified stamp" that can be put
on your DIRF cert. If you fail to meet the tech standard, but meet the
recreational standard, then you will get a "rec DIRF" qualification.
You can later go back and get re-checked for tech if you want. If you
take the class in the proper tech gear and meet the higher standard, you
will get the "tech DIRF" qualification.

4) A lot of additional material has been added to the class, primarily
in the decompression/gases area. This is in part due to the fact that
nitrox certification will likely be added to the DIRF class.

5) There is an increased emphasis on performing skills as a team.

5.a) Private lessons are not allowed, since the instructor cannot be
effective at being both an instructor and a buddy.

6) If the student has a primary light, all skills will be required to be
performed with the light deployed and standard light signalling should
be performed by the student (instead of hand signals).

7) A stronger emphasis on "balanced rig", including some exercises to
highlight and verify.

8) Basic rescue for toxing and unconscious divers has been added.

Misc items that have been clarified:
- "Modified s-drill" requires full deployment of the long hose
(not just the "make sure it's deployable")
- Valve drill should be *before* s-drill.
- For the primary light - there should be a
fixed boltsnap on the handle. If you desire an
additional attachment at the back of the ballast
(for letting the light hang down), you should put
a loop of bungie and use a double-ender or tuck the clip into a
secure band
- No break-away connections
- Light cord goes over the long hose
- Both the corrugated hose and inflator hose go under
the bungie
- "Performing skills one-handed" pertains primarily
to things like being able to clip things off one-handed.
It does not mean that, for example, you should do the
mod-S or full-S using just one hand. And you can use
2 hands for replacing the mask.
- Showing your pressure gauge is not part of the s-drill
- front crotch-strap d-ring should not be tucked
- rear d-ring should be present
- when deploying an open/semi-closed SMB, the preferred
method is to inflate with your long hose, however
exhaling into it is also acceptable.
- for the purposes of the DIRF class, SMBs should not
be "pre-loaded" (spool already connected). However in
standard diving this is acceptable.

-Dave

[ericfine50]

Joe,

Thank you for the heads up. After taking my Fundies class 3 years ago (pre- Pass/Fail). I felt it was way to much information for a 3 Day format. When in fact, once you figure in travel time - it was really a day and a 1/2 in my case. Seems they may offer a DIR-F Rec and a DIR-F Tech.

[Sterny]

Hmmm - could be a bit of a surprise coming if you're currently planning to do DIR-F (again, in my case!). I'm torn between signing up now for the shorter version which I can do in a weekend (or with 1 day of holiday), or doing the 'right thing' and going for the longer version. I'm already rescue and nitrox qualified through PADI, so it would just be about more time to polish those skills and the other fundies skills, I guess.

Not sure I like this... anyone think it's a good idea?

[ericfine50]

The DIR-F class is very different from what PADI teaches. It is 180% different. After taking it once, I wished it was 4 days. They will throw a ton of information at you and show you were the bar is set for GUE classes. The best part - they videotape you in the water. That is a great way to see if you are doing a skill correctly verses thinking you are doing a skill correctly.

Eric

[Mal Bridgeman]

As I understand it (and I could be wrong on this) Tech 1 used to be the entry level class, but too many people turned up not being able to do the basics....so DIR-F was invented.

I understand AG was of the opinion that DIR-F should be a two stage course....one for teaching and one for assessment because too many people were not able to get the pass at the first attempt.

Now the course is being extended and an ostensibly lower qualification is being offered...Rec-F.

Can someone explain the rationale for the changes?

Thanks
Mal

[ericfine50]

Quote:

=Mal BridgemanAs I understand it (and I could be wrong on this) Tech 1 used to be the entry level class, but too many people turned up not being able to do the basics....so DIR-F was invented

.

what GUE Instructors consider to be basics vs what some other instructors consider to be basic is different. This is all dependant on the Instructor of course, but you had tri-mix guys with 100s of dives failing T1. DIR-F was first more of a seminar than a pass/fail class. It was to show people were the bar was set for future GUE classes.

Quote:

I understand AG was of the opinion that DIR-F should be a two stage course....one for teaching and one for assessment because too many people were not able to get the pass at the first attempt.

That was one idea - Sometimes it can be hard for people to take off the additional time x months down the road to finish the class.

Quote:

Now the course is being extended and an ostensibly lower qualification is being offered...Rec-F.

Not so - There are OW divers that have no intention of going into Technical Diving that are DIR. They want to learn the basics as well. I am sure some of the "tech" aspects would be removed from this class.


Eric

[canucksubmariner]

I know this is an old post but it was recently brought up at Sccubaboard.

My reply there

"I followed the link and it doesn't make any sense at all!

From an instructional point you will have students in DIR open water rig(singles no lights single reg) and students in DIR tech rig (doubles, manifold, light can and backup) taking the course together with a different standard applied learning different techniques in regards to equipment management. That is as far from "Doing it Right" as possible. Talk about a CF!

What would make sense is a DIRF that is singles no lights and 3 days long then after a 3 month period(practice) those that want to go onto tech would take a two day DIRIT (DIR Intro Tech) in doubles, light can etc. That would be a optimal situation where on each course the students are matched and evaluated to the same standard.

Not only would the students be better off having taken a course that applies to what they want to do and the instructor finding it better/more efficient to teach but both the instructor and GUE would make more money!

[JohnKendall]

Quote: (Originally Posted by canucksubmariner)

I know this is an old post but it was recently brought up at Sccubaboard.

My reply there

"I followed the link and it doesn't make any sense at all!

From an instructional point you will have students in DIR open water rig(singles no lights single reg) and students in DIR tech rig (doubles, manifold, light can and backup) taking the course together with a different standard applied learning different techniques in regards to equipment management. That is as far from "Doing it Right" as possible. Talk about a CF!

What would make sense is a DIRF that is singles no lights and 3 days long then after a 3 month period(practice) those that want to go onto tech would take a two day DIRIT (DIR Intro Tech) in doubles, light can etc. That would be a optimal situation where on each course the students are matched and evaluated to the same standard.

Not only would the students be better off having taken a course that applies to what they want to do and the instructor finding it better/more efficient to teach but both the instructor and GUE would make more money!

I think you may have the wrong end of the stick. I'll try and explain it as I understand it.

The new fundies course will contain all the stuff in the current fundies course, and have Nitrox and basic rescue added in. Instead of the current Fail, Provisional, Pass we will have Fail, Rec, Tech. This does NOT mean the new Rech pass is similar to the old provisional. To gain a Tech pass you MUST do the course in doubles, with a can light. You need to be deemed proficiant at all the basic fundies skills while using the can light. You need to have a working Back kick. For a Rec pass you need to be proficiant at the fundies skills, but don't have to do it in Doubles, or with a can light. If you don't meet the standard then you get a fail, and will be told by your instructor what you have to practice to pass, and whether you can come back for one check-out dive, repeat bits of the course, or repeat the whole course.

HTH
John

[canucksubmariner]

Quote: (Originally Posted by JohnKendall)

I think you may have the wrong end of the stick. I'll try and explain it as I understand it.

The new fundies course will contain all the stuff in the current fundies course, and have Nitrox and basic rescue added in. Instead of the current Fail, Provisional, Pass we will have Fail, Rec, Tech. This does NOT mean the new Rech pass is similar to the old provisional. To gain a Tech pass you MUST do the course in doubles, with a can light. You need to be deemed proficiant at all the basic fundies skills while using the can light. You need to have a working Back kick. For a Rec pass you need to be proficiant at the fundies skills, but don't have to do it in Doubles, or with a can light. If you don't meet the standard then you get a fail, and will be told by your instructor what you have to practice to pass, and whether you can come back for one check-out dive, repeat bits of the course, or repeat the whole course.

HTH
John

Thats fine John but it doesn't change my point regarding having two types of Fundies going on at the same time being stupid and not DIR.

You are comparing to the "old" fundies. I'm not, I'm looking at the "new" course on its merits from a instructional P.O.V. and benefit to the student.

[JohnKendall]

Quote: (Originally Posted by canucksubmariner)

Thats fine John but it doesn't change my point regarding having two types of Fundies going on at the same time being stupid and not DIR.

It's not 2 types of fundies. It's the same skills. You can do a fundies in doubles and no can light, you can do fundies with a single and a can light. The only differences between doubles and singles is the valve drill, which is more complex for the doubles. It's exactly the same as we have now. The Rec pass is pretty much the same as the current pass, all we have gained is a higher level of pass with more stringent standards.

HTH
John