Candidate standards - What if? - Page 2

Ahmed Adly, Marlin Inn DC · February 21st, 2007, 01:58 PM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch)

Mal, with very few exceptions, GUE instructors are the best instructors in existance. Being the best, they are entitled to charge top dollar for their services and over here most of them do.
Michael

You are, of course being sarcastic now are you not?
Don't you think that it would be more accurate to say that "GUE instructors are the best at teaching GUE courses?"

Mats Edenfeldt · February 21st, 2007, 01:58 PM

The problem with most organizations over the brooder spectrum is that there is to few non compromising instructors. They work with it and is only interested in taking the students cash and get rid of them as soon as possible, maybe sell them some gear while they are at it. There is no general interest in educating a safe diver or a thinking diver.

This goes for many of the tech courses out there to. Now there is always good instructors that have this none compromising view of education and the mind set of the diver in any organization but they can be easily counted.

GUE is different, there instructors have a general love for diving and also technical diving, they want to educate safe and thinking divers and share there view of diving and there experience. From this the standard is born and they can charge top dollar for it. But its still not about the money, they can never get the money back that they have spent on accumulating there experience, its merely a fee for there effort and it will pay for the expenses and some pocket cash. So I think this is a small price to pay to be able to train with the best in the world.

To have basic rules and set standard for this is rare, GUE is alone with this “hard” and none compromising standard, also some other organizations have something that could look like the GUE standard but it is more a general recommendation rather then a requirement for the student. So if its not a requirement for the student the instructors will slowly drift farther away from it.

For me it is absolutely basic that the diver follows the standard of GUE for the more demanding diving, people in general have a misconception of what it takes physically and mentally to do 50+ meter diving or cave diving.

Then you can categorize and discuss what obese is, and out of shape. But I think the swim test for one is a good base line, if you are a long time smoker and obese or out of shape you will not be able to complete it, if your not a former swimmer. And as a former swimmer with the body as your temple you probably will not be either obese or a smoker or do drugs.

I would not hesitate to deny a student certification if they where not suitable as a diver. And I have done so. I think the GUE standard is what we should trive for when we are talking about technical diving and also with some minor adjustments even for ordinary scuba classes. I also would like to see a PFO test as mandatory if you where to peruse tech 1 and 2, with higher demand on ten diver it come higher demand on the body and also the hart so why not. Its merely precaution in the interest of the student rather then a hard ass attitude of the organization or the instructor.

We need more hard asses and none compromising instructors to be able to keep the technical dive community moving. If we don’t have this it will just fall in to another PADI organization style and then we are lost in the jungle of commercial interest and greedy dive shop owners.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch)

I have stated that:

"If you're DIR divers, you shouldn't have a PFO, be out of shape, smoke cigarettes, be grossly obese, dehydrated, injured, or drunk." I think that being under the influence of drugs is another automatic no-no.

I don't think that many DIR divers will have a problem with the above standard description, but at what point does someone who does not meet the above standard become a rule one exclusion?

What should a Fundamentals Instructor do when he discovers that a prospective student candidate not only is not DIR, but because of being overweight/smoking/drinking too much etc, doesn't have a chance of becoming DIR? In the old days, the answer was clear, throw the student out and refund his money. Now since there are so many more GUE Instructors, where should the line be drawn? What should the instructor do
who sees one of his Tech 2 students drunk on the 3rd evening of the course, or sees him smoking behind the car after a training dive?

If the instructor cuts the student some slack, when does this start perverting the DIR idea?
If the instructor is a hard ass, and doesn't cut the student some slack, how much damage to the GUE reputation will take place, not to ignore how much less will the instructor earn?

I personally feel that any one of the following are grounds enough to deny a certification, irrespective of how well the candidate dives:

have a PFO,
be out of shape,
smoke cigarettes,
be grossly obese,
be drunk/have a drinking problem,
stoned,
under the influence of drugs and some prescription medications,

Candidates who are currently dehydrated, or injured are IMO also not easy to find a solution for, maybe the certification should be withheld until the candidate is healthy again.

What do you think? Whats best for the organization, the candidate, and the instructor?

Michael

BTW, I am not an instructor for agency, do all my diving because I enjoy it, and don't plan to make money off students.

Soggyfox · February 21st, 2007, 02:04 PM

Where does GUE/DIR stand with disabled divers?

apologies for no intro if thats a problem but i was just mooching through the forum and the question sprung to mind.

Ahmed Adly, Marlin Inn DC · February 21st, 2007, 02:23 PM

Hello Mats,

Quote:

The problem with most organizations over the brooder spectrum is that there is to few non compromising instructors. They work with it and is only interested in taking the students cash and get rid of them as soon as possible, maybe sell them some gear while they are at it. There is no general interest in educating a safe diver or a thinking diver.

In this context, remember that most training agencies are training people to dive and thats it. People join dive courses for many reasons and those reasons are not the business of the agency. The agency is there to offer a class so that the DIVER can go and do whatever he wanted to dive for and to discover if this is the real means to the ends he is after.

Try a truer broader perspective of these opinions and you will probably find I am right. Although I know more crapy instructors than I know good ones, who am I to judge.

Michael-Fisch · February 21st, 2007, 02:24 PM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Soggyfox)

Where does GUE/DIR stand with disabled divers?

apologies for no intro if thats a problem but i was just mooching through the forum and the question sprung to mind.

From my reading of the standards, and understanding, GUE does not have a problem with disabled Ex-Divers.
Divers who can meet and exceed GUE's standards are NOT disabled.

If you are disabled and want to dive, I'm sure that any GUE instructor or representative would be happy to direct you to the Handicapped Scuba Association, but in the GUE scheme of things there is no place for a handicapped buddy.

If I'm wrong, please correct me.

Michael

DanPartelly · February 21st, 2007, 02:46 PM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch)

I personally feel that any one of the following are grounds enough to deny a certification, irrespective of how well the candidate dives:

have a PFO,
be out of shape,
smoke cigarettes,
be grossly obese,
be drunk/have a drinking problem,
stoned,
under the influence of drugs and some prescription medications,

Candidates who are currently dehydrated, or injured are IMO also not easy to find a solution for, maybe the certification should be withheld until the candidate is healthy again.

What do you think? Whats best for the organization, the candidate, and the instructor?

So, lemme understand. If Im dehydrated, instead of getting a glass of water, I should be rejected certification :P

Mother of god, rights to deny certification ? Ill tell you something, the only thing which is grounds to deny certification is failure to meet the standards.
The rest is too subjective and cant be evaluated correctly.

DanPartelly · February 21st, 2007, 02:49 PM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch)

From my reading of the standards, and understanding, GUE does not have a problem with disabled Ex-Divers.
Divers who can meet and exceed GUE's standards are NOT disabled.

If you are disabled and want to dive, I'm sure that any GUE instructor or representative would be happy to direct you to the Handicapped Scuba Association, but in the GUE scheme of things there is no place for a handicapped buddy.

If I'm wrong, please correct me.

Michael

RossTraining.com Blog » More Inspiration

If think Id rather have him as a buddy than a somebody with a supperior mentality, which uses terms as Handicapped Scuba Association.

I guess Id be way safer with the disabled :P

DanPartelly · February 21st, 2007, 02:58 PM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch)

Mal, with very few exceptions, GUE instructors are the best instructors in existance. Being the best, they are entitled to charge top dollar for their services and over here most of them do. I have never heard that their training was not worth what the students paid for it.

Well there where voices saying they didnt got anything from a DIR-f , so dont generalize. The ammount charged by their services is also subject to market, if you wanna pay what they ask for good, if you dont, goodbye. As numbers of GUE instructors grow, another thing will arise: concurrency between them. They aint all created equal, some are better than others, and being a very good diver doesn't mean you are also a good teacher.
I would *choose* a instructor for DIR-f , and not blindly go with whoever comes.

Do not forget, I *HIRE* this guy, so I expect a lot from him. Should he fail to meet my expectations in the preliminary talks, goodbye, world is full of instructors.

There are enough instructors from other agencies to give you the quality of the instruction you get from a GUE instructor, dont worry.

Adrian Kelland · February 21st, 2007, 03:04 PM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch)

From my reading of the standards, and understanding, GUE does not have a problem with disabled Ex-Divers.
Divers who can meet and exceed GUE's standards are NOT disabled.

If you are disabled and want to dive, I'm sure that any GUE instructor or representative would be happy to direct you to the Handicapped Scuba Association, but in the GUE scheme of things there is no place for a handicapped buddy.

If I'm wrong, please correct me.

Michael

I think you are wrong.

If a disabled diver meets the criteria, they meet the criteria. Have you considered what you mean by disabled? Where does being disabled start?

Seeing as GUE is an American organisation, I would be surprised if they could get away with proscribing disabled people. This may also include artificially high 'standards'. I am pretty sure that any UK instructor who discriminated on the basis of a disability would have an interesting time justifying themselves. 'Reasonable' being the watch word.

I could quite understand a disabled diver, or any other diver for that matter, not wanting to dive with someone who dismisses people so easily.

Adrian

fraser · February 21st, 2007, 03:09 PM

Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch)

I believe that the sooner you have the test done, the better.
It's rediculous to spend $20.000 on equipment diving and divetraining, then do a PFO test, and decide that you would rather avoid the surgical risk of getting it plugged. Your only real option then is to bite the bullet and sell your gear, or go back to doing conservative recreational dives always worrying about your next hit.

Since the general population has a 20% chance of having a PFO, 1 untested diver in 5 should not be diving, and that's way too many. If these divers are also diving the edge of the envelope, that's an awful lot of agony with crippled divers and heartbroken relatives.

How an instructor is supposed to sell a $500 PFO test, is something that I'm very grateful that I have never had to get involved in, but above the Cave1/Tech1 level it's a very good idea.

Agree with this 100%

Quote:

Smoking is a no-no

And yet a number of known smokers have taken Fundamentals classes. So not entirely a no-no.

Fraser.

February 21st, 2007, 01:58 PM	#11 (permalink)
Ahmed Adly, Marlin Inn DC(Offline) New Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: hurghada Posts: 864	Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch) Mal, with very few exceptions, GUE instructors are the best instructors in existance. Being the best, they are entitled to charge top dollar for their services and over here most of them do. Michael You are, of course being sarcastic now are you not? Don't you think that it would be more accurate to say that "GUE instructors are the best at teaching GUE courses?" __________________ It has just dawned on me.... We are all just recycled stardust Ahmed Adly, www.deepvoyage.com

February 21st, 2007, 01:58 PM	#12 (permalink)
Mats Edenfeldt(Offline) Cave is fun :) Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Sweden - Stockholm Posts: 157	The problem with most organizations over the brooder spectrum is that there is to few non compromising instructors. They work with it and is only interested in taking the students cash and get rid of them as soon as possible, maybe sell them some gear while they are at it. There is no general interest in educating a safe diver or a thinking diver. This goes for many of the tech courses out there to. Now there is always good instructors that have this none compromising view of education and the mind set of the diver in any organization but they can be easily counted. GUE is different, there instructors have a general love for diving and also technical diving, they want to educate safe and thinking divers and share there view of diving and there experience. From this the standard is born and they can charge top dollar for it. But its still not about the money, they can never get the money back that they have spent on accumulating there experience, its merely a fee for there effort and it will pay for the expenses and some pocket cash. So I think this is a small price to pay to be able to train with the best in the world. To have basic rules and set standard for this is rare, GUE is alone with this “hard” and none compromising standard, also some other organizations have something that could look like the GUE standard but it is more a general recommendation rather then a requirement for the student. So if its not a requirement for the student the instructors will slowly drift farther away from it. For me it is absolutely basic that the diver follows the standard of GUE for the more demanding diving, people in general have a misconception of what it takes physically and mentally to do 50+ meter diving or cave diving. Then you can categorize and discuss what obese is, and out of shape. But I think the swim test for one is a good base line, if you are a long time smoker and obese or out of shape you will not be able to complete it, if your not a former swimmer. And as a former swimmer with the body as your temple you probably will not be either obese or a smoker or do drugs. I would not hesitate to deny a student certification if they where not suitable as a diver. And I have done so. I think the GUE standard is what we should trive for when we are talking about technical diving and also with some minor adjustments even for ordinary scuba classes. I also would like to see a PFO test as mandatory if you where to peruse tech 1 and 2, with higher demand on ten diver it come higher demand on the body and also the hart so why not. Its merely precaution in the interest of the student rather then a hard ass attitude of the organization or the instructor. We need more hard asses and none compromising instructors to be able to keep the technical dive community moving. If we don’t have this it will just fall in to another PADI organization style and then we are lost in the jungle of commercial interest and greedy dive shop owners. Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch) I have stated that: "If you're DIR divers, you shouldn't have a PFO, be out of shape, smoke cigarettes, be grossly obese, dehydrated, injured, or drunk." I think that being under the influence of drugs is another automatic no-no. I don't think that many DIR divers will have a problem with the above standard description, but at what point does someone who does not meet the above standard become a rule one exclusion? What should a Fundamentals Instructor do when he discovers that a prospective student candidate not only is not DIR, but because of being overweight/smoking/drinking too much etc, doesn't have a chance of becoming DIR? In the old days, the answer was clear, throw the student out and refund his money. Now since there are so many more GUE Instructors, where should the line be drawn? What should the instructor do who sees one of his Tech 2 students drunk on the 3rd evening of the course, or sees him smoking behind the car after a training dive? If the instructor cuts the student some slack, when does this start perverting the DIR idea? If the instructor is a hard ass, and doesn't cut the student some slack, how much damage to the GUE reputation will take place, not to ignore how much less will the instructor earn? I personally feel that any one of the following are grounds enough to deny a certification, irrespective of how well the candidate dives: have a PFO, be out of shape, smoke cigarettes, be grossly obese, be drunk/have a drinking problem, stoned, under the influence of drugs and some prescription medications, Candidates who are currently dehydrated, or injured are IMO also not easy to find a solution for, maybe the certification should be withheld until the candidate is healthy again. What do you think? Whats best for the organization, the candidate, and the instructor? Michael BTW, I am not an instructor for agency, do all my diving because I enjoy it, and don't plan to make money off students. __________________ GUE: DIR-Fundamentals, Cave 1, Cave 2 NAUI: Trimix 1, Technical diver, Instructor, DM, Wreck penetration, Oxygen service technician IANTD: Advanced Nitrox, Nitrox Various: Apeks tech, Poseidon tech "Doing it right really means to do it properly. No skimping and no compromises. It sounds easy enough but it is not - it requires balls of steel" Peter Steinhoff

February 21st, 2007, 02:23 PM	#14 (permalink)
Ahmed Adly, Marlin Inn DC(Offline) New Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: hurghada Posts: 864	Hello Mats, Quote: The problem with most organizations over the brooder spectrum is that there is to few non compromising instructors. They work with it and is only interested in taking the students cash and get rid of them as soon as possible, maybe sell them some gear while they are at it. There is no general interest in educating a safe diver or a thinking diver. In this context, remember that most training agencies are training people to dive and thats it. People join dive courses for many reasons and those reasons are not the business of the agency. The agency is there to offer a class so that the DIVER can go and do whatever he wanted to dive for and to discover if this is the real means to the ends he is after. Try a truer broader perspective of these opinions and you will probably find I am right. Although I know more crapy instructors than I know good ones, who am I to judge. __________________ It has just dawned on me.... We are all just recycled stardust Ahmed Adly, www.deepvoyage.com

February 21st, 2007, 02:46 PM	#16 (permalink)
DanPartelly(Offline) New Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Romania Posts: 147	Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch) I personally feel that any one of the following are grounds enough to deny a certification, irrespective of how well the candidate dives: have a PFO, be out of shape, smoke cigarettes, be grossly obese, be drunk/have a drinking problem, stoned, under the influence of drugs and some prescription medications, Candidates who are currently dehydrated, or injured are IMO also not easy to find a solution for, maybe the certification should be withheld until the candidate is healthy again. What do you think? Whats best for the organization, the candidate, and the instructor? So, lemme understand. If Im dehydrated, instead of getting a glass of water, I should be rejected certification :P Mother of god, rights to deny certification ? Ill tell you something, the only thing which is grounds to deny certification is failure to meet the standards. The rest is too subjective and cant be evaluated correctly. __________________ “It is not death that a man should fear, but he should fear never beginning to live.” Marcus Aurelius Ad 121 - 180

February 21st, 2007, 02:49 PM	#17 (permalink)
DanPartelly(Offline) New Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Romania Posts: 147	Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch) From my reading of the standards, and understanding, GUE does not have a problem with disabled Ex-Divers. Divers who can meet and exceed GUE's standards are NOT disabled. If you are disabled and want to dive, I'm sure that any GUE instructor or representative would be happy to direct you to the Handicapped Scuba Association, but in the GUE scheme of things there is no place for a handicapped buddy. If I'm wrong, please correct me. Michael RossTraining.com Blog » More Inspiration If think Id rather have him as a buddy than a somebody with a supperior mentality, which uses terms as Handicapped Scuba Association. I guess Id be way safer with the disabled :P __________________ “It is not death that a man should fear, but he should fear never beginning to live.” Marcus Aurelius Ad 121 - 180

February 21st, 2007, 02:04 PM	#13 (permalink)
Soggyfox(Offline) New Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Oz Posts: 2	Where does GUE/DIR stand with disabled divers? apologies for no intro if thats a problem but i was just mooching through the forum and the question sprung to mind.

February 21st, 2007, 02:24 PM	#15 (permalink)
Michael-Fisch(Offline) New Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Germany Posts: 266	Quote: (Originally Posted by Soggyfox) Where does GUE/DIR stand with disabled divers? apologies for no intro if thats a problem but i was just mooching through the forum and the question sprung to mind. From my reading of the standards, and understanding, GUE does not have a problem with disabled Ex-Divers. Divers who can meet and exceed GUE's standards are NOT disabled. If you are disabled and want to dive, I'm sure that any GUE instructor or representative would be happy to direct you to the Handicapped Scuba Association, but in the GUE scheme of things there is no place for a handicapped buddy. If I'm wrong, please correct me. Michael

February 21st, 2007, 02:58 PM	#18 (permalink)
DanPartelly(Offline) New Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Romania Posts: 147	Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch) Mal, with very few exceptions, GUE instructors are the best instructors in existance. Being the best, they are entitled to charge top dollar for their services and over here most of them do. I have never heard that their training was not worth what the students paid for it. Well there where voices saying they didnt got anything from a DIR-f , so dont generalize. The ammount charged by their services is also subject to market, if you wanna pay what they ask for good, if you dont, goodbye. As numbers of GUE instructors grow, another thing will arise: concurrency between them. They aint all created equal, some are better than others, and being a very good diver doesn't mean you are also a good teacher. I would choose a instructor for DIR-f , and not blindly go with whoever comes. Do not forget, I HIRE this guy, so I expect a lot from him. Should he fail to meet my expectations in the preliminary talks, goodbye, world is full of instructors. There are enough instructors from other agencies to give you the quality of the instruction you get from a GUE instructor, dont worry. __________________ “It is not death that a man should fear, but he should fear never beginning to live.” Marcus Aurelius Ad 121 - 180

February 21st, 2007, 03:04 PM	#19 (permalink)
Adrian Kelland(Offline) Can't remember Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Exeter - Team of 1 Posts: 273	Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch) From my reading of the standards, and understanding, GUE does not have a problem with disabled Ex-Divers. Divers who can meet and exceed GUE's standards are NOT disabled. If you are disabled and want to dive, I'm sure that any GUE instructor or representative would be happy to direct you to the Handicapped Scuba Association, but in the GUE scheme of things there is no place for a handicapped buddy. If I'm wrong, please correct me. Michael I think you are wrong. If a disabled diver meets the criteria, they meet the criteria. Have you considered what you mean by disabled? Where does being disabled start? Seeing as GUE is an American organisation, I would be surprised if they could get away with proscribing disabled people. This may also include artificially high 'standards'. I am pretty sure that any UK instructor who discriminated on the basis of a disability would have an interesting time justifying themselves. 'Reasonable' being the watch word. I could quite understand a disabled diver, or any other diver for that matter, not wanting to dive with someone who dismisses people so easily. Adrian __________________ The Diving Encyclopaedia Exeter BSAC Royal National Lifeboat Institution UK Transplant Register

February 21st, 2007, 03:09 PM	#20 (permalink)
fraser(Offline) "I'm only late on your timescale" Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Um, somewhere in the Americas Posts: 465	Quote: (Originally Posted by Michael-Fisch) I believe that the sooner you have the test done, the better. It's rediculous to spend $20.000 on equipment diving and divetraining, then do a PFO test, and decide that you would rather avoid the surgical risk of getting it plugged. Your only real option then is to bite the bullet and sell your gear, or go back to doing conservative recreational dives always worrying about your next hit. Since the general population has a 20% chance of having a PFO, 1 untested diver in 5 should not be diving, and that's way too many. If these divers are also diving the edge of the envelope, that's an awful lot of agony with crippled divers and heartbroken relatives. How an instructor is supposed to sell a $500 PFO test, is something that I'm very grateful that I have never had to get involved in, but above the Cave1/Tech1 level it's a very good idea. Agree with this 100% Quote: Smoking is a no-no And yet a number of known smokers have taken Fundamentals classes. So not entirely a no-no. Fraser. __________________ Damn it feels good to be a gangsta