PADI Training vs.. others

In article <060320062135551447%sytech@yahoo.com>,
<sytech@yahoo.com> writes:
...
>I have to say that I was really put off by the PADI Training Manual. The
>text was adequate but the questions at the end of the chapters could
>have been answered by children. ...

It was apparent to me when I took the PADI courses that the questions
at the end of each chapter were taken [mostly?] word-for-word from the
text in the chapter. Students are required to complete the questions
and instructors are required to collect them. (Or at least this was
the situation back then.)

My belief is that this is intended as a means to help ensure that the
students actually read the book. Sad to say, my experience is that not
all students actually do read the book. {sigh}

Most of the required knowledge can be absorbed from classroom lecture
and videos. Without the requirement to "turn in" the completed questions,
some instructors would probably not make any attempt to ensure that
students had read the book.

This is not a indicment of either PADI or any/all of its instructors.
Much of the USA population is just damned lazy when it comes to
education. {sigh, again}

Just in case it is NOT obvious, I do believe that SCBUA students should
thoroughly read and study the course manual!

--
Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale FL USA
(hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)
All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.

In article <060320062135551447%sytech@yahoo.com>,
<sytech@yahoo.com> writes:
...
>I have to say that I was really put off by the PADI Training Manual. The
>text was adequate but the questions at the end of the chapters could
>have been answered by children. ...

It was apparent to me when I took the PADI courses that the questions
at the end of each chapter were taken [mostly?] word-for-word from the
text in the chapter. Students are required to complete the questions
and instructors are required to collect them. (Or at least this was
the situation back then.)

My belief is that this is intended as a means to help ensure that the
students actually read the book. Sad to say, my experience is that not
all students actually do read the book. {sigh}

Most of the required knowledge can be absorbed from classroom lecture
and videos. Without the requirement to "turn in" the completed questions,
some instructors would probably not make any attempt to ensure that
students had read the book.

This is not a indicment of either PADI or any/all of its instructors.
Much of the USA population is just damned lazy when it comes to
education. {sigh, again}

Just in case it is NOT obvious, I do believe that SCBUA students should
thoroughly read and study the course manual!

--
Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale FL USA
(hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)
All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.

Thus spake mike gray <omgray@worldnet.att.net> :

>sytech@yahoo.com wrote:
>> I received my YMCA Open Water Cert. about 6 years ago and recently
>> received my Advanced Open Water Cert. through PADI.
>>
>> The latter dive instructor was very knowledgeable and skilled but I
>> have to say that I was really put off by the PADI Training Manual. The
>> text was adequate but the questions at the end of the chapters could
>> have been answered by children. The questions were very simple
>> multiple choice or "yes" or "no" answers.
>>
>> Something like this:
>>
>> "Lung expansion injuries are good for you" (yes) (no)
>>
>> I'm really not exaggerating much at all.
>>
>>
>> I can really see now that PADI wants to virtually assure that you pass
>> the course. As a result as I continue my training I will do all that I
>> can to avoid PADI. I realize that the expertise of the diving
>> instructor is what's most important but I have no faith in an
>> organization which allows such dumb and self evident questions in their
>> training manual. My initial YMCA Certification (written part) was a
>> hundred times more demanding than the PADI Advanced Cert..
>>
>> Any comments will be appreciated.
>>
>> Sy
>>
>
>There is some very basic "book" knowledge important to entry
>level courses, but not much. Mostly, it's skill development.
>
>As you get further into diving, you may find an interest in
>algorithm development, history, archeology, diving physics and
>physiology, gas blending, equipment design, cave mapping or any
>of the other hundreds of subjects we love to argue about here
>(or used to, anyway) and which require the kind of knowledge
>that can be assessed with a written exam.
>
>Meanwhile, work on developing yer in-water skills - that's how
>other, experienced divers will rank you as a good or bad diver.
>
>Leave the essays to those that don't dive much.
>
>m

In point of fact, skills development is what AOW is about. You should
already have the basic knowledge, it's about stepping up a notch.
--
dillon

Could have been is in the past
Could be is in the future
There is only the now

Thus spake mike gray <omgray@worldnet.att.net> :

>sytech@yahoo.com wrote:
>> I received my YMCA Open Water Cert. about 6 years ago and recently
>> received my Advanced Open Water Cert. through PADI.
>>
>> The latter dive instructor was very knowledgeable and skilled but I
>> have to say that I was really put off by the PADI Training Manual. The
>> text was adequate but the questions at the end of the chapters could
>> have been answered by children. The questions were very simple
>> multiple choice or "yes" or "no" answers.
>>
>> Something like this:
>>
>> "Lung expansion injuries are good for you" (yes) (no)
>>
>> I'm really not exaggerating much at all.
>>
>>
>> I can really see now that PADI wants to virtually assure that you pass
>> the course. As a result as I continue my training I will do all that I
>> can to avoid PADI. I realize that the expertise of the diving
>> instructor is what's most important but I have no faith in an
>> organization which allows such dumb and self evident questions in their
>> training manual. My initial YMCA Certification (written part) was a
>> hundred times more demanding than the PADI Advanced Cert..
>>
>> Any comments will be appreciated.
>>
>> Sy
>>
>
>There is some very basic "book" knowledge important to entry
>level courses, but not much. Mostly, it's skill development.
>
>As you get further into diving, you may find an interest in
>algorithm development, history, archeology, diving physics and
>physiology, gas blending, equipment design, cave mapping or any
>of the other hundreds of subjects we love to argue about here
>(or used to, anyway) and which require the kind of knowledge
>that can be assessed with a written exam.
>
>Meanwhile, work on developing yer in-water skills - that's how
>other, experienced divers will rank you as a good or bad diver.
>
>Leave the essays to those that don't dive much.
>
>m

In point of fact, skills development is what AOW is about. You should
already have the basic knowledge, it's about stepping up a notch.
--
dillon

Could have been is in the past
Could be is in the future
There is only the now

Thus spake hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) :

>In article <060320062135551447%sytech@yahoo.com>,
><sytech@yahoo.com> writes:
>..
>>I have to say that I was really put off by the PADI Training Manual. The
>>text was adequate but the questions at the end of the chapters could
>>have been answered by children. ...
>
>It was apparent to me when I took the PADI courses that the questions
>at the end of each chapter were taken [mostly?] word-for-word from the
>text in the chapter. Students are required to complete the questions
>and instructors are required to collect them. (Or at least this was
>the situation back then.)
>
>My belief is that this is intended as a means to help ensure that the
>students actually read the book. Sad to say, my experience is that not
>all students actually do read the book. {sigh}
>
>Most of the required knowledge can be absorbed from classroom lecture
>and videos. Without the requirement to "turn in" the completed questions,
>some instructors would probably not make any attempt to ensure that
>students had read the book.
>
>This is not a indicment of either PADI or any/all of its instructors.
>Much of the USA population is just damned lazy when it comes to
>education. {sigh, again}
>
>Just in case it is NOT obvious, I do believe that SCBUA students should
>thoroughly read and study the course manual!

Charlie, the specific question had to do with AOW. I agree entirely
that OW students MUST read and understand the manual. But for AOW,
most of the written stuff is fluff. I hate teaching much of the AOW
manual. There are things like search patterns and simple dive
planning for deep dives that are important, but a certain amount of
the manual is a repeat of the OW manual. What's more valuable, and
what I stress more, is the stuff we do on shore before each dive and
what we do in the water. AOW is about learning new skills, not on how
to become a diver. Learning new skills safely.
--
dillon

Could have been is in the past
Could be is in the future
There is only the now

Thus spake hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com (Charlie Hammond) :

>In article <060320062135551447%sytech@yahoo.com>,
><sytech@yahoo.com> writes:
>..
>>I have to say that I was really put off by the PADI Training Manual. The
>>text was adequate but the questions at the end of the chapters could
>>have been answered by children. ...
>
>It was apparent to me when I took the PADI courses that the questions
>at the end of each chapter were taken [mostly?] word-for-word from the
>text in the chapter. Students are required to complete the questions
>and instructors are required to collect them. (Or at least this was
>the situation back then.)
>
>My belief is that this is intended as a means to help ensure that the
>students actually read the book. Sad to say, my experience is that not
>all students actually do read the book. {sigh}
>
>Most of the required knowledge can be absorbed from classroom lecture
>and videos. Without the requirement to "turn in" the completed questions,
>some instructors would probably not make any attempt to ensure that
>students had read the book.
>
>This is not a indicment of either PADI or any/all of its instructors.
>Much of the USA population is just damned lazy when it comes to
>education. {sigh, again}
>
>Just in case it is NOT obvious, I do believe that SCBUA students should
>thoroughly read and study the course manual!

Charlie, the specific question had to do with AOW. I agree entirely
that OW students MUST read and understand the manual. But for AOW,
most of the written stuff is fluff. I hate teaching much of the AOW
manual. There are things like search patterns and simple dive
planning for deep dives that are important, but a certain amount of
the manual is a repeat of the OW manual. What's more valuable, and
what I stress more, is the stuff we do on shore before each dive and
what we do in the water. AOW is about learning new skills, not on how
to become a diver. Learning new skills safely.
--
dillon

Could have been is in the past
Could be is in the future
There is only the now

In article <vmjr021iv7gjhuqg95ag9lg5qvjnum81i9@4ax.com>,
Dillon Pyron <dmpyronINVALID@austin.rr.com> writes:


>Charlie, the specific question had to do with AOW. I agree entirely
>that OW students MUST read and understand the manual. But for AOW,
>most of the written stuff is fluff. I hate teaching much of the AOW
>manual. There are things like search patterns and simple dive
>planning for deep dives that are important, but a certain amount of
>the manual is a repeat of the OW manual. What's more valuable, and
>what I stress more, is the stuff we do on shore before each dive and
>what we do in the water. AOW is about learning new skills, not on how
>to become a diver. Learning new skills safely.

Dillon, I agree that my prior comment applies less to AOW and more to OW.
I also agree that AOW is about developing existing skils and learning
new ones.

As I recall, the AOW manual I used had a general chapter or two, then
a group of chapters for the specific dives being done in the AOW course.
i.e. Deep dive; boat dive; night dive; etc.

We had only one "classroom" session, in which we discussed the general
material. We were told to read the chapter(s) pertient to the dives being
done. We then discussed this information at the dive site, before diving.

I think this was a good approach.

As to the end-of-chapter exercises/questions -- while the OW questions
were certainly right-from-the-book, my memory is that the AOW questions
we not always so "obvious". In fact, I recall that we never got a
"definative" for some of the questions. If I went back and looked at
them, I'd expect that to this day I don't know what point(s) they were
trying to make.

Not only PADI manuals, but manuals from at least two other agencies I've
experienced are often not well written. I think the problem is that they
are written by individuals who know a lot about diving, but not a lot about
the educational process. Good divers are not always good instructors;
good divers and good instructors do not always write good manuals.

--
Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale FL USA
(hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)
All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.

In article <vmjr021iv7gjhuqg95ag9lg5qvjnum81i9@4ax.com>,
Dillon Pyron <dmpyronINVALID@austin.rr.com> writes:


>Charlie, the specific question had to do with AOW. I agree entirely
>that OW students MUST read and understand the manual. But for AOW,
>most of the written stuff is fluff. I hate teaching much of the AOW
>manual. There are things like search patterns and simple dive
>planning for deep dives that are important, but a certain amount of
>the manual is a repeat of the OW manual. What's more valuable, and
>what I stress more, is the stuff we do on shore before each dive and
>what we do in the water. AOW is about learning new skills, not on how
>to become a diver. Learning new skills safely.

Dillon, I agree that my prior comment applies less to AOW and more to OW.
I also agree that AOW is about developing existing skils and learning
new ones.

As I recall, the AOW manual I used had a general chapter or two, then
a group of chapters for the specific dives being done in the AOW course.
i.e. Deep dive; boat dive; night dive; etc.

We had only one "classroom" session, in which we discussed the general
material. We were told to read the chapter(s) pertient to the dives being
done. We then discussed this information at the dive site, before diving.

I think this was a good approach.

As to the end-of-chapter exercises/questions -- while the OW questions
were certainly right-from-the-book, my memory is that the AOW questions
we not always so "obvious". In fact, I recall that we never got a
"definative" for some of the questions. If I went back and looked at
them, I'd expect that to this day I don't know what point(s) they were
trying to make.

Not only PADI manuals, but manuals from at least two other agencies I've
experienced are often not well written. I think the problem is that they
are written by individuals who know a lot about diving, but not a lot about
the educational process. Good divers are not always good instructors;
good divers and good instructors do not always write good manuals.

--
Charlie Hammond -- Hewlett-Packard Company -- Ft Lauderdale FL USA
(hammond@not@peek.ssr.hp.com -- remove "@not" when replying)
All opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily my employer's.

Dillon Pyron wrote:

> In point of fact, skills development is what AOW is about.

Which skills specifically?

And, developped into what?

Matthias

Dillon Pyron wrote:

> In point of fact, skills development is what AOW is about.

Which skills specifically?

And, developped into what?

Matthias