Advanced Diver Theory Paper - Discrimination

[Robert]

Yesterday I had the misfortune to sit the Advanced Diver paper and you might have read from the thread below that our TO had to obtain a new set of papers (75% of those on the course were instructors and so had access to the exam papers on the CD-Rom).

Unfortunately 75% of us also failed the paper. That's not really the problem, as maybe we didn't revise properly, know the right things etc. etc. What annoys me is that, knowing we would have a different paper, I worked through the specimens provided on the CD, and the paper we were given yesterday bore no relation in terms of difficulty.

Whilst again I'm not arguing that this is the problem, as perhaps the AD exam should be a lot harder than those papers provided on the CD (which appear to be a lot easier than some of the DL papers!).

It seems particularly unfair to me that some clubs will simply use the papers from the CD allowing people to get through with a minimum of effort and knowledge, but because we have offered our services as instructors to the club we get hammered with much more difficult papers (which also contained factual inaccuracies).

So that's one club that loses the services of two prospective ADs as we can't be bothered with it anymore.
Heigh ho - vitriol over!

Robert

[Lindsey Doyle]

Hi Robert,
I was wondering if you had only commenced AD training since the new DTP in Oct 02? Because (if like most of the DLs in my branch), you'd already done various SDCs eg O2, PRM etc, before Oct, then that's part of the OLD AD syllabus done). Would it then not be possible to complete training under the old syllabus & therefore sit a tried & tested exam?
Of course, this is all irrelevant if you've only done the new course.....
But I would reconsider resitting it, AD is meant to be a challenging exam - so you'd do better next time, being better prepared!!
Where did the paper come from in the end,BTW?
Lindsey.

[John Williams]

What annoys me is that, knowing we would have a different paper, I worked through the specimens provided on the CD, and the paper we were given yesterday bore no relation in terms of difficulty.

Whilst again I'm not arguing that this is the problem, as perhaps the AD exam should be a lot harder than those papers provided on the CD (which appear to be a lot easier than some of the DL papers!).

It seems particularly unfair to me that some clubs will simply use the papers from the CD allowing people to get through with a minimum of effort and knowledge, but because we have offered our services as instructors to the club we get hammered with much more difficult papers (which also contained factual inaccuracies).

So that's one club that loses the services of two prospective ADs as we can't be bothered with it anymore.
Heigh ho - vitriol over!

Robert


But That's where you'd be assuming unfairness where the simply isn't any!

The way that "new" exam papers are generated (from HQ anyway) is that they have a large database of questions in several categories


First Aid
Physics
Physiology
Seamanship
Equipment
etc
etc

A new paper is generated by asking the database to provide a set number of random questions from each section. These are then printed as a single document and sent out.

This is exactly the way that the questions in the manual/on the CD were produced (except that these were saved for wider distribution) .... so there is no bias.

It could be that in certain cases the random selection pulls out all the "easy" questions - and some all the "hard" ones.

But as Chris Tarrant is known to say - they are all easy ...but only if you know the answer.

Please go back to your branch and work out what went wrong. Your Area Coach (and the Regional Coaching Team)might be able to help.

Could your branch have been training people to pass the exams?
(and then presented with a different exam there was a hitch)

Does your branch tend towards a particular type of diving?
(and the exam tests for a broader set of knowledge than would be needed within your branch - part of the AD programme is to broaden your horizons beyond your comfort zone)

Was there a particular part of the exam that caused you all problems...this might help your DO/TO to recognise areas for improvement in the branches instruction. Doing this sort of analysis is the mark of a good instructor - so as most of your AD candidates are instructors you could be an important part of that process.

Hope you succeed next time.


John

PS
Some aspects of my AD assessments took more than one go - but I like to think of myself as a fairly effective AD. Remember that it is far easier to learn from setbacks and working out a strategy to avoid recurrence than it is to learn from "sailing through"

[matt]

So that's one club that loses the services of two prospective ADs as we can't be bothered with it anymore.
Heigh ho - vitriol over!

I guess what dissapoints me about this is the give up at the first hurdle attitude.

As an instructor you will occassionaly have to fail trainees who do not demonstrate an adequate standard. How would you want them to react? There are a few who respond 'Its all so unfair' and they make me want to jack it all in. However the vast majority of trainees realise that we are trying to ensure they are safe divers. I understand that withdrawing from instructing hurts this majority not the small minority of whingers, hence I continue.

If you want to give up then give up but I would suggest that what you should do is talk to your TO. If 75% failed there may have been a problem with how candidates were prepared for the exam. Responsibility for such a problem lies with your TO and I would hope he is concerned enough to want to sort it out.

When a trainee Ocean Diver fails to make the standard I work with the trainee to overcome the problem. Every training problem is surmountable just as long as neither I or the trainee give up. I don't see it as being any different for Advanced or even First Class.

From a practical perspective I think it is important that divers are prepared to fail occassionaly. Underwater things don't always go right. If you are going to get home safely the one thing you can never do is give up.

Regards
Matt

[Steve Walker]

TBH, I thought the new specimen AD exams were fairly straightforward and nowhere near as challenging as an old AD exam I saw a couple of years ago.

None of us replying saw your exam so we don't know how "wide of the mark" it was or not so we're all just conjecturing, but don't you think that if it was too easy it would be meaningless? For instance, when I've been involved in teaching undergrads I'm always surprised that most of them seem to think it would be great if they all got a "First" and rarely does anyone understand that if that happened it would devalue the qualification, I don't think diving theory is that much different, if it's worthwhile it _has_ to be difficult, or at least stretching your capabilities.

And if, as should be the case, your examiner went over the questions you got wrong and explained why they were wrong, (and assuming it wasn't down to the sterotypical ambiguity of some BSAC theory questions) you will now be better equipped for your next attempt.
IIRC I failed my first _two_ tries at the old Novice theory, but I didn't let that put me off, my personal philosophy is that a lot of this life is about getting back on the horse after you've been thrown, you know the story about Robert the Bruce and the spider?

Regards
Steve

[Mike Halligan]

Unfortunately 75% of us also failed the paper. That's not really the problem, as maybe we didn't revise properly, know the right things etc. etc. What annoys me is that, knowing we would have a different paper, I worked through the specimens provided on the CD, and the paper we were given yesterday bore no relation in terms of difficulty.

Hmmm, yes, specimen papers can be a bugger. I find we often interpret them as some sort of standard and I suffered this as ADO, when a majority of candidates routinely failed CD exams. I found that when we prepared them better, they performed better. Strange that, isn't it? Reliance on the materials provided by BSAC without additional careful explanation and adequate practice simply wasn't enough or so it seemed, and then I realised that it wasn't meant to be!

If a bunch of DL Instructors can't get through their AD theory, then ther is something wrong. Surely, as the Branch's training team, they should be considering and debating with the DO the standards and targets for all grades - and as candidates have a more than passing interest in those for AD. Whether it was distraction from the change of syllabus, or a good Spring for diving, whatever, performance didn't match up to promise on the day. It happens. An experienced, practiced, AD instructor has sat down and devised an exam (around 2 eveinings work) and some of you didn't meet the target. How is this discrimination? No-one in their right mind would set the CD-ROM sample papers for an AD exam. In fact, I can't justify to myself setting one for the OD exam. So it's hardly likely that they are being trotted out very often elsewhere. At the same time, your DO has to be satisfied that your assessment matches the normal diving conditions and practices of your Branch - which the CD-ROM is unlikely to address.

So that's one club that loses the services of two prospective ADs as we can't be bothered with it anymore.

Hold on, a whole new course completing the equivalent of DPM, PRM, O2, God knows what else and you bin it over a short multi-guess theory test? Don't give up now. Remember, the man who never made a mistake, never made anything. Learn from the experience (what you get when you don't get what you want), never assume (it makes an ASS of U and ME) and try again (and again).

Regards,
Mike

[Kevyn Bodman]

Every training problem is surmountable just as long as neither I or the trainee give up. I don't see it as being any different for Advanced or even First Class.

From a practical perspective I think it is important that divers are prepared to fail occassionaly. Underwater things don't always go right. If you are going to get home safely the one thing you can never do is give up.

Regards
Matt

I didn't reach the required standard on my first attempt at the AD lift from 20m.I was an OWI at the time,(still am)
The instructor (at a BSAC School ) insisted on proper standards,gave a couple of pointers that I hadn't come across before in my branch and next time I did it very well.
He did a good job for me,for the BSAC and for divers within my branch who I've dived with since and passed on tips to.
When I came back to the branch and mentioned to one of my buddies that I'd fouled up the first one he thought I might be a bit embarrassed about it.O.K. I'd rather have nailed it perfectly first time but I'd have been more embarrassed if I'd been nodded through as a paying customer.
I've occasionally failed students in assessments,not often;and I've never regretted it.
I've often repeated lessons/exercises before allowing stucents to try for assessment.
I'm planning to take AD theory (maybe) in a couple of months.
I hope questions are not ambiguous,but I also hope they're difficult.If I take it I hope to pass first time,but if I don'tthen,having decided to take it I'll keep at it.
Kevyn.

[Stephen H]

Just to play devil's advocate, it occurs to me that as an instructor I would be horrified if 75% of the candidates I presented for examination failed. I can reasonably expect some to fail through poor revision etc. but a 75% failure rate would suggest to me that there was a problem with the instructor rather than with the candidates. After all, the exam is just a formalised 'check for transfer'.

I would be even more dismayed if such a large proportion failed an exam I had set since I would base that exam on the information I had delivered i.e. each question would be set on the basis of I had given a reasonably attentive student the information to answer it. If I believed I had and a large proportion failed then I would have to question my teaching methodolgy.

If I found myself with students pointing out that some of the answers I gave were factually incorrect then, to be fair, I would have to seek external advice, perhaps from the coaching scheme.

That said, I'm afraid giving in at this stage strikes me as a little petulant. And that, coupled with the attitude that a new paper had to be set because someone might have cheated and looked at the papers on the CD suggests to me that your branch teaches to pass exams rather than uses exams to confirm that skills/knowledge are present.

Steve

[Robert]

Thanks for all your replies - I would have answered sooner but I've just finished off running a very nice weekend of diving from Brighton on the Girl Gray.

Lindsey: 'I was wondering if you had only commenced AD training since the new DTP in Oct 02? Because (if like most of the DLs in my branch), you'd already done various SDCs eg O2, PRM etc, before Oct, then that's part of the OLD AD syllabus done). Would it then not be possible to complete training under the old syllabus & therefore sit a tried & tested exam?'
Yes, and indeed with two of the other course members, we all completed all the required SDCs a little while ago, but I was told by the TO 'I'd rather you didn't'.

John: 'Could your branch have been training people to pass the exams?'
No, we were given no specimen papers, other than those we could see for ourselves.

'Does your branch tend towards a particular type of diving?
(and the exam tests for a broader set of knowledge than would be needed within your branch - part of the AD programme is to broaden your horizons beyond your comfort zone)'
Not really, but the latitude and longitude of Saba, and using tables to fly within 24hrs of diving are part of a set of knowledge that I'm not too concerned with!

Matt: 'Responsibility for such a problem lies with your TO and I would hope he is concerned enough to want to sort it out.'
Possibly, but the response 'I have another paper that you can do' doesn't really help in today's training ethos does it?! Sadder still that one DL refused to take a trainee Sports diver for a dive after the exam as he didn't feel knowledgeable enough.

Steve: '...but don't you think that if it was too easy it would be meaningless?'
As I commented already the papers on the CD seemed to me to be very easy - my point is that are we not to be allowed some relevant guidance,(in the form of the papers provided on the CD) to aid our revision?

Mike: 'Hold on, a whole new course completing the equivalent of DPM, PRM, O2, God knows what else and you bin it... '
Yes, you're completely right and this part of my post was slightly tongue in cheek as I'm moving closer to the coast and the logistics mean I won't be able to go to my old club!

Stephen H: 'I would be even more dismayed if such a large proportion failed an exam I had set since I would base that exam on the information I had delivered i.e. each question would be set on the basis of I had given a reasonably attentive student the information to answer it.'
Yes possibly, but we still believe that the content of the exam paper does not match up with what is taught in the course.

Best regards to you all,
Robert