Oops, didn't mean to imply military dive training.  I have no basis to comment
on that.  What I was refering to was your standard military training course-
one colonel put it this way, "The army has perfected the fine art of condensing
a half hour lecture into three days of training."

Wendell



>This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand

>this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
>
>------_=_NextPart_001_01C1151A.F18A4BF0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>While not having the base of experience that you do with TDI, PADI, etal -
I do take issue with your inclusion of military diving training in that group.
 
>
>Military diving education does have a minimum standard, but then again so does
GUE.  The standard is just higher than other programs.  The military is more
than willing to drop those who cannot meet the minimum standard.  A certain
percentage of each class is expected to wash out for reasons of academics,
physical
conditioning, and suitability for diving.  Medical fitness is determined before
they get to training.
>
>Navy diving procedures, equipment, and techniques to be used are clearly
delineated
in excruciating detail (some might say anal).  In fact it can be argued that
the slow speed of adoption of new diving technology is a byproduct of the strict
approval process for military diving.  Standards of instruction and
standardization
of instruction are very high on the training radar.  
>
>One of the things that I see in common between GUE and military diving
education
is the willingness to tell a student or potential student that they aren't ready
for the type of diving they want to do.  IMHO, admittedly from a limited
perspective,
almost anyone in reasonable health can safely engage in recreational diving
as long as they respect their limitations.  Technical diving is not necessarily
 a natural skill progression from recreational diving.  In order to engage in
Tech diving safely,
> you must possess a set of attributes including skill, experience, medical
condition, physical conditioning, and discipline.  Until the rest of the
civilian
agencies recognize that and are willing to turn away candidates (and their
money)
who don't meet admission requirements, I am afraid the continued string of tech
diving accidents is inevitable.
>
>Of course I'm just one of those old time hard hat divers basking in the glow
of times of iron men and copper helmets.  
>
>B.L. Flank
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: wendell grogan [mailto:wgrogan@dc*.ne*]
>Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:30 PM
>To: Chris Elmore; ScottBonis@ao*.co*
>Cc: techdiver@aquanaut.com
>Subject: Re: WTF is Ed?
><snip>
>There is little fundamental difference between the approaches and standards
of the first three.  There are a number of 
>factors involved in this, but they are primarily related to the problem of
mass standardized education.  The way courses 
>are taught by NAUI, PADI, and TDI, are the same as the military, Boy Scouts,
and YMCA ( I'm sure there are others, but 
>these are the ones I'm familiar with).  Whenever you want to set a standard,
the simpliest way to is draw up a list of 
>information that must be learned, and then set up a lecture series to make
sure that all the items are presented.
>
>Almost by necessity, the standards are the minimum that must be taught, and
do not allow for individualization.  In 
>practice, given the minimum standards prescribed, there ends up being alot
a variation in how the course work is 
>implemented, especially when in comes to the practicum for a particular course.

>
>GUE, on the other hand, takes a different approach.  With DIR, everything,
down to the size of clips, is delineated.  
>This could be based on arbitrary decisions, but with these guys, everything
has been very carefully thought out.  
>Nothing new is added to the gear set up without careful consideration of all
the possible implications of each step.   No 
>one else is doing this.  Does this mean that there might not be another way
to do something?  No, of course not.  
>However, why try to re-invent the wheel?  DIR invites critical analysis and
wins.
>
>------_=_NextPart_001_01C1151A.F18A4BF0
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]