View Full Version : Advanced Diver Qual
Steve Pearson
19-10-2005, 22:06
Over the past few weeks the question about the Advanced Diver qualification has been raised on several forums. This is a fairly contentious issue, which is certainly worthy of discussion.
I agree that the AD lessons AP1 and AP2 need some reviewing as they appear to be cause for concern. It may be that they could be dropped from the syllabus in their current format, but become similar to what we have to do in FCD but at a slightly lower level. ie.
a) produce an expedition plan, and admin instruction. Not as in depth as FCD (which is 15 pages long) but maybe 6 pages planning a club expedition to an unknown site. To be marked by a nominated/volunteer from the regional coaching team.
b) attend a 1 day regionally organised expedition day off a hard boat, where all candidates have to plan as a group the night before, for the following days diving. During the days diving, each will take a turn at specific tasks such as DM, ADM, Boat Marshal, navigator.
c) the candidates will lead a dive each with an examiner and be critiqued upon their diving skills.
d) during the course of the day candidates will be questioned on their diving knowledge applicable to all grades up to AD.
These expededition days should be run every 4 months, and reviewed if they cannot meet up with demand, with constructive feedback in order to improve the training implemented by the region.
I addition to these, to pass AD all divers must have attended and passed an advanced Nitrox course.
The AD qual has to be an advancement on DL, and as such is a stepping stone to FCD or AI. Whether people like it or not, it shouldn't be seen as a formality or easy ticket and should be something worth achieving.
I've seen people banging on about it not being worth anything and it should be made easier. It shouldn't be easy, but should be achievable without unrealistic constraints as there are at the moment.
What are other peoples views/suggestions for its improvement?
Steve
Paul Morris
20-10-2005, 12:04
I've seen people banging on about it not being worth anything and it should be made easier. It shouldn't be easy, but should be achievable without unrealistic constraints as there are at the moment.
What are other peoples views/suggestions for its improvement?
Steve
Steve,
Having recently just gone through this myself, I can say it was seriously hard work. The new Advanced Diver seems considerably harder to achieve than the old SDC based scheme. However, having now got over that mountain of work I really am proud of the achievement. I really do think that it is a good thing. It has pushed me far harder than I've ever been pushed before (excluding the OWI exams!) and I think it has/will benefit our club greatly as more divers come through it.
The amount of experience seems reasonable, the rescue reviews were not onerous for myself as an OWI, but a necessary 'review/check/update' of anyone that may have no recent rescue training. Thinking there is little else to it ignores the main purpose of an Advanced Diver - to safely organise advanced diving for the club (AP1 & AP2). If you don't want to do this, remain at Dive Leader and accept that.
The major problem for us as a club, was the requirement of AIs to teach some of the lessons.
We coped with this in two ways:
1) Used an AI from the region to teach the required theory parts
2) Submit the exped plan to an AI for review. (AI was invited on the weekend but couldn't make it). DO & TO (both OWI) came out on the weekend and gave assesment reports back to the regional AI who signed off the training.
The best thing of all, is that now myself and some of those who came on my weekend are now organising more adventurous diving from our own club boats. We found a new launch site, four new dive sites, and it has breathed a breath of fresh air into the club. I look forward to the other AD candidates taking us out for their weekends!
Obviously, there aren't an infinite supply of "unknown sites", but with a little imagination or adventure I'm sure most clubs can go to a different launch site or find a site that has not been dived (by at least the candidates!).
As far as changes to the course, the expedition plan you suggest is AP2. I based mine on the FCD example expedition plan. There is nothing like putting the plan into practice, so I wouldn't suggest it reverts to a paper excercise alone. Executing the plan for real gave me so much confidence when (almost) everything worked!
As for your suggestions b) c) d), well isn't this making the AD qual unachievable for branches to train by insisting on regional involvement. This doesn't make it any more accessable than it is now.
I feel the course is the toughest diver grade I've ever been through, and rightly so! The work and effort involved in getting through AP2 took many many weeks, but it *was* worth it and has given me the confidence to consider FCD in the future (something worked). A little common sense, or maybe some guidance notes would solve most issues around provision of AP2, as we did above.
However, for branches without AIs it is difficult. We had to rely on regional help, but what you are proposing is to insist on regional assessment which I think is OTT to formalise that. The answer really, is for more of us to get on an AIC and do the AI exam (which is no bad thing if we're to be responsible for turning out Advanced Divers).
Hope this provides a balance to the debate. Not everyone is dissatisfied with the course, it has paved the way and provided a taste of FCD where previously there was none. The constraints aren't unrealistic. It is possible as it stands, but it is way way harder to achieve than the old Advanced Diver course. This is a good thing as there are Advanced divers out there who lack the confidence/experience to organise a club dive. Without the training and experience which they missed, they probably never will.
If in doubt ask! We couldn't see how we could deliver it, so we contacted our regional coach.
Unless I have missed something the main objection has been the lack of AIs in branches available to teach these lessons. Requiring regional involvement does not really solve anything as you still have the same resourcing issue in the branches. You could try waiting for the number of AIs to increase, or you could modify the lesson so that it can be delivered by an OWI+AD. ADs know how to organise expeds and OWIs know how to teach, so what does an AI add? Is it so vital that it should present a problem to a member trying to progress his training and widen his role in the branch.
The other issue with AP2 would appear to be the need for an unknown site, as the more experienced the branch the harder they are to find. Perhaps, 'unfamiliar', would be a better word to use.
...These expededition days should be run every 4 months,
So to get an AD qualification; I must be prepared to go to the expense of a weekend on a hard boat with the travel and accommodation charges that entails. No doubt the regional staff will want their expenses paying. To cap it all I only get 3 opportunities a year to fit into my hectic lifestyle. Somehow I doubt authoring a 6 page dive plan/ra and having some bloke I just met pick holes in my dive skills, is going to look attractive enough. I might start thinking cynical old Fred has a point and the region just want to jolly it about rather than get on with instructor events and the SDCs I do want.
Personally I think your scheme sounds like AP2. Nice idea but has not been thought through and examined with a critical eye. There is also still a question over resourcing. You were telling us all how hard Regional coaches work (which I do not doubt in the slightest). Does the region have the capacity to run an exped for every DL that may potentially want one?
I addition to these, to pass AD all divers must have attended and passed an advanced Nitrox course.
Why?
The AD qual has to be an advancement on DL, and as such is a stepping stone to FCD or AI. Whether people like it or not, it shouldn't be seen as a formality or easy ticket and should be something worth achieving.
Completely agree. But what exactly is an Advanced Diver. If BSAC think it is all about driving boats and running expeds they have a very narrow and (IMHO) dated view.
Personally I think the grade should recognise and encourage people that are diving in an advanced manner with some sort of purpose, which could be;
+ expeds to far flung places
+ driving boats
+ diver rescue and first aid
+ surveying a wreck on their doorstep
+ taking stunning photographs
+ instructing perhaps
+ technical diving
+ cave diving
DL pretty much proves that you can dive competently (rescue, leadership, decompression and a 50m air limit). BSAC don't need to be continually questioning those skills. Advanced should be saying there is more to diving than paperwork, logistics and jumping in the water swimming about. There is a lot of scope for (fun, useful, interesting) BSAC SDCs and integrating specialist training from outside agencies. We want to integrate don't we?
I've seen people banging on about it not being worth anything and it should be made easier. It shouldn't be easy, but should be achievable without unrealistic constraints as there are at the moment.
Challenging, achievable, ACCESSIBLE, DESIRABLE.
What are other peoples views/suggestions for its improvement?
I have suggested some tweaks to the current course. I read elsewhere an idea to move some of the less essential elements of DL into AD to replace lessons like AP2, that could have merit. I have also meandered down a different kind of Advanced Diver all together. Whatever is decided please consider the resourcing when designing these courses. No point having the best course in the World if no one is available to teach it.
It is good to see these subjects being flung open for discussion on the forums.
Andy Wade
21-10-2005, 10:27
Unless I have missed something the main objection has been the lack of AIs in branches available to teach these lessons. Requiring regional involvement does not really solve anything as you still have the same resourcing issue in the branches. You could try waiting for the number of AIs to increase, or you could modify the lesson so that it can be delivered by an OWI+AD. ADs know how to organise expeds and OWIs know how to teach, so what does an AI add, and is it so vital that it should present a problem to a member trying progress his training and widen his role in the branch.
The other issue with AP2 would appear to be the need for an unknown site, as the more experienced the branch the harder they are to find. Perhaps, unfamiliar, would be a better word to use.
:=...These expededition days should be run every 4 months,
So to get an AD qualification I must be prepared to go to the expense of a weekend on a hard boat with the travel and accomodation charges that entails. No doubt the regional staff will want their expenses paying. To cap it all I only get 3 opportunities a year to fit into my hectic lifestyle. Somehow I doubt authoring a 6 page dive plan/ra and having some bloke I just met pick holes in my dive skills, is going to look attractive enough. Maybe cynical old Fred has a point and the region just want to jolly it about rather than get on with instructor events and the SDCs I do want.
Personally I think it sounds like AP2, nice idea but has not been thought through and examined with a critical eye. There is also still a question over resourcing. You were telling us all how hard Regional coaches work (which I do not doubt in the slightest). Does the region have the capacity to run an exped for every DL that may potentially want one?
:=I addition to these, to pass AD all divers must have attended and passed an advanced Nitrox course.
Why?
:=The AD qual has to be an advancement on DL, and as such is a stepping stone to FCD or AI. Whether people like it or not, it shouldn't be seen as a formality or easy ticket and should be something worth achieving.
Completely agree. But what exactly is an Advanced Diver. If BSAC think it is all about driving boats and running expeds they have a very narrow and (IMHO) dated view.
Personally I think the grade should recognise and encourage people that are diving in an advanced manner with some sort of purpose, which could be;
+ expeds to far flung places
+ driving boats
+ diver rescue and first aid
+ surveying a wreck on their doorstep
+ taking stunning photographs
+ instructing perhaps
+ technical diving
+ cave diving
DL pretty much proves that you can dive competantly (rescue, leadership, decompression and a 50m air limit). BSAC don't need to be continually questioning those skills. Advanced should be saying there is more to diving than paperwork, logistics and jumping in the water swimming about. There is a lot of scope for (fun, useful, interesting) BSAC SDCs and integrating specialist training from outside agencies. We want to integrate don't we?
:=I've seen people banging on about it not being worth anything and it should be made easier. It shouldn't be easy, but should be achievable without unrealistic constraints as there are at the moment.
Challenging, achievable, DESIRABLE.
:= What are other peoples views/suggestions for its improvement?
I have suggested some tweaks to the current course. I read elsewhere an idea to move some of the less essential elements of DL into AD to replace lessons like AP2, that could have merit. I have also meandered down a different kind of Advanced Diver all together. Whatever is decided please consider the resourcing when designing these courses. No point having the best course in the World if no one is available to teach it.
Wholeheartedly agree.
I worry about the enablement of branches to pass people up to AD.
We've been down that road in the past, with the SDC route for a lot of AD training. It just made it impossible for people without unlimited free time or money to achieve AD.
Nice idea but not that practical.
It first came about from observation of standards on FCD exams, which led to a belief that AD wasn't really being achieved within branch.
IMVHO the NDC should find a way to allow an AD/OWI to be able to oversee all the training for AD.
For crying out loud, just what is required here?
To make sure that a prospective AD can plan and organise a dive trip to a new site? Surely an AD/OWI can oversee this one? They've already proved that they themselves can do it, and they are qualified as an instructor.
AI is _desirable_, but the lack of one being available should not preclude the ability to award this IMHO essential qualification within branch.
A branch should be capable of going diving pretty much anywhere they like. AD is supposed to be able to do this.
I never had an AI or (a CI for that matter) check my ability to organise these kind of trips, and I'm no-one special.
Times and equipment may change, but the sea doesn't. It didn't stop me going on to higher qualifications either. I do agree with the basic need to have NQI's do the training nowadays, but I question the level this has been set at in some aspects of AD.
Come on NDC, I fully understand the need to maintain/improve standards within an ever changing diving world, but lets avoid pulling the ladder up to a height which reduces the amount of AD's. BSAC drastically needs more of them. Let's enable branches to do this, but with an _option_ to ask for help from regional resources if they feel the need.
David Walker
21-10-2005, 14:01
2) Submit the exped plan to an AI for review. (AI was invited on the weekend but couldn't make it). DO & TO (both OWI) came out on the weekend and gave assesment reports back to the regional AI who signed off the training.
See it would probably work quite well like that - you don't need to find the AI for a specific weekend, etc... just anytime you can meet them for a couple of hours. Unfortunately most AI's won't take that view, and will say that the rules say that they need to be present, and won't sign it off unless they are. If anything, the fact that some instructors will do this is even more of a problem - what happened to consistency and standards? Why have rules if they're ignored by some? And if we're happy for some instructors to ignore the rules, why not change them so that all AIs can do the same where they see fit?
David
We've been down that road in the past, with the SDC route for a lot of AD training. It just made it impossible for people without unlimited free time or money to achieve AD.
Without wishing to drag up the past, all I can say is that AD SDCs taught me more about BSAC and cajoling regional coaches than they did about diving. I am very lucky to be in an active, established, coastal branch. During my time following the SDC trail I met a lot of BSAC members that do not have that luxury and SDCs suited them. I have no objection to the region running events for these people. As a BSAC member 2 miles from the sea and diving a couple times a week, I resented having to travel a hundred miles and wait months for a course, to re-learn skills I had already picked up from branch members.
Nice idea but not that practical.
It first came about from observation of standards on FCD exams, which led to a belief that AD wasn't really being achieved within branch.
A lot was going on around that time. There was a belief that removing the DL grade was a good idea, turned out to be wrong though. We seem to have 'issues' throughout the DTP and ITS as a result of the sweeping changes that were made. We are over the financial problems that eventually brought 'The great experiment' to a close. Personally I think we now need to address these in plain view of how diving has moved on and look to provide todays divers with the BSAC they clearly want. That BSAC must have the capacity to provide training as and when it's members want it. Commercial agencies would kill for the branch delivery channel that BSAC has available.
AI is _desirable_, but the lack of one being available should not preclude the ability to award this IMHO essential qualification within branch.
I do agree with the basic need to have NQI's do the training nowadays, but I question the level this has been set at in some aspects of AD.
Having trod the ITS in it's current form to OWI, I am a better instructor for it. My complaints are that it takes too long and is not attractive to enthusiastic/experienced _divers_ - the very people that have the most to offer the branch. Had my DO not persuaded me to help out and 'Teach' as a DL, I would have objected and defferred exactly as the SDs/DLs I nag today. The other observation is that had I not been exposed to progressively more challenging trainees, my core diving skills would not have developed to the point they are now.
Just throwing ideas in the air...
AI is supposed to be about Advanced Instructing. Perhaps Advanced Instructing might be what is needed to teach, recognise and assess potential instructors at branch level. Perhaps it might involve overseeing those that have useful experience to pass on but are not so interested in exams.
Paul Morris
21-10-2005, 18:04
:=2) Submit the exped plan to an AI for review. (AI was invited on the weekend but couldn't make it). DO & TO (both OWI) came out on the weekend and gave assesment reports back to the regional AI who signed off the training.
See it would probably work quite well like that - you don't need to find the AI for a specific weekend, etc... just anytime you can meet them for a couple of hours. Unfortunately most AI's won't take that view, and will say that the rules say that they need to be present, and won't sign it off unless they are. If anything, the fact that some instructors will do this is even more of a problem - what happened to consistency and standards? Why have rules if they're ignored by some? And if we're happy for some instructors to ignore the rules, why not change them so that all AIs can do the same where they see fit?
David
Ah, now therein lies the problem. You've hit the nail on the head right here. Consistency, standards and rules. I seem to remember BSAC is rather thin on "rules", preferring guidelines. Problem here is as you say, some AIs will interpret the rules as law, others will see them as guidelines and apply flexibility where appropriate. Do these lessons require direct supervision, or not? If they do, then yes achieving AD in a branch without an AI gets much more difficult.
I firmly believe that signoff should remain with the AI. I am an AD+OWI but I couldn't offer an AD candidate as much experience and guidance as an AI. Not saying that will be the case for someone more experienced than I generally, but insisting on having AI sign-off implies a more experienced advanced diver (that has been re-checked through the ITC for standards!).
Remember for OWI the ITC only assesses us on material up to and including Dive Leader level. I think the AI sign-off is a sensible "quality control" factor. If you are an experienced OWI + AD, then you really should get around to your AIC+AIE!
:- If you are an experienced OWI + AD, then you really should get around to your AIC+AIE!
Hmm...No thanks. It has the same lack of appeal that FCD does for me
Dave
Steve Pearson
22-10-2005, 23:52
I wasn't advocating AD's should go down the SDC route again, but that the advanced Nitrox qual should be a pre-requisite as OD's are to be taught it in the new year as part of the OD syllabus, and as an AD you should be up to date with diving practices/advancements.
I still think that having a regionalised one day training day would be good, along the same lines as the FCD expedition day, and don't give me the bull about busy schedules etc. It's a days diving. How many dives do potential AD's do a year? 1-2, 5-10, or upwards of 50, so what's new you'd just be going diving for another day, with people you may not know, outside the club, and getting signed up towards a qual that you want.
Like I said earlier you aren't going to get it handed to you on a plate, earn it, do what's required of you and feel that you've deserved it afterwards. If you want things easy, join PADI, pay your money and get your qual.
So what if you might only get the opportunity three times a year. FCD practicals are only three times a year one in Scotland, one in Plymouth and one in Northern Ireland.
If those of you don't feel that the qualification is worth going for, then why do you all want it?
It would be nice to hear someone from HQ's views on this and also for a few other people to chip in.
Look at it as a brainstorming session, if everyone puts forward their suggestions ideas etc, maybe some good ideas will come from it and ultimately improve the current situation
Come on guys what are your views.
Steve
:=If those of you don't feel that the qualification is worth going for, then why do you all want it?
You'll have to excuse me. It's late and i'm in a cynical
mood.
Err who says we do?
I can do 50m deco diving, have PRM, O2 & 1st Aid and get OWI
status which will enable me to teach up to my grade.
I can even do Nitrox and assist to become a Nitrox Inst.
So that will be 50m with deco with or without mix.
Please tell me why I would need Advanced?
Dont bother, there is only one reason and thats to be the
clubs DO.
That it, the one and only thing that Advanced gets you.
Now we are going to hear about how we need more AI's etc,
but isnt the only reason we need those again is to create more
Advanced? And isnt the real reason for that so that eventually
somwhere down the line they end up working ITS events etc.
It's very very simple if you want to improve Advanced.
Make it relevant and make it inclusive of what many of us
go to other agencies for.
Heres an idea. How about an Advanced grade with endorsements,
in the same way we have Approved Instructors.
Advanced (Tech)
Advanced (Boat)
Advanced (S&R/NAS)
Advanced (IT) [Would need to be an OWI]
All basic Advanced in the 1st instance, but splitting to
specialise in each area.
Now you have a grade which is specific and capitalises in each
persons personal area. Instead of being a weak mismash of
too many topics we have time spent on specific areas which are inclusive of other qualifications.
So
Advanced (Tech) Includes: Extended range and Introductions to
Trimix and CCR. Covers twins and stages etc in depth (sadly
lacking at the mo).
Advanced (Boat) Includes Boat Handling and Diver cox + advanced
chartwork, radio certificate etc. maybe tie in with RYA?
Advanced (S&R/NAS) Includes: S&R with practical work alongside
NAS leading to parrellel qualifications.
Advanced (IT) Includes: Expansion of the AIC + detailed work
on teaching at higher levels leading to the AIE and IT status.
If you think about it this isnt that far away from when we
had elective SDC's in the old syllabus. Only this time the
resultant grade would actually allow you to do more.
Comments?
TerryH
David Walker
23-10-2005, 14:38
If those of you don't feel that the qualification is worth going for, then why do you all want it?
You're assuming that people do AD for their own purely selfish needs...
David
Steve
I am going through AD training at the moment and hope to complete it in the near future. I agree with most of your comments bar one.
Please expand on your comment why should I complete an advance Nitrox course? At this moment I have no interest in completing a Nitrox course and furthermore I can not afford the extra costing which it will involve. IMHO I will not be the only one.
Saying that I do agree that AD must have a more intricate knowledge of Nitrox, so therfore should it be within the AD sylabus?
Taff
Nigel Hewitt
24-10-2005, 11:21
Please expand on your comment why should I complete an advance Nitrox course? At this moment I have no interest in completing a Nitrox course and furthermore I can not afford the extra costing which it will involve. IMHO I will not be the only one.
ROTFL
David Walker
24-10-2005, 14:43
Saying that I do agree that AD must have a more intricate knowledge of Nitrox, so therfore should it be within the AD sylabus?
Eh? You agree that ADs should have the knowledge of nitrox, but don't think you should do it? There's no point putting it into the AD syllabus because the courses are already run... the Adv.Nx SDC... the one you don't want to do :O\
David
mark wood
24-10-2005, 18:39
As per my previous post I believe BSAC should look at this problem with AP1 & AP2 and give some firm guidlelines or carry out an urgent review of the situation, I have read posts where people have had AI's that have signed off the training without being on the trip by getting reports from other AD's and DO's this seems unfair to me as not all AI's are interpretting things this way. I suggested that a DO should be able to sign it off as they alone are ultimately responsible for all diving within a club and for appointing dive organisers. Also what makes other AD's able to decide whether you hgave attained the requirements of AP2 being that the majority of current AD's will have completed the old SDC based syllabus and have not done AP1 & AP2 themselves.
BSAC should realise that there requirements of AP1/2 are unrealistic within the constraints of small clubs, without some degree of modification.
Personally I also have the added difficulties of a young family which makes it very difficult getting away for the weekend, both timewise and financially, this time and finance issue should not make it more difficult for some people to attain AD as it does others, the course should reflect your diving skills and knowledge and not your ability to have numerious weekends away from home spending money on hardboat trips, accomodation etc.
I fully aggree that AD should be a diving qualification worth acheiving as I personally feel that some of the lower grades are achieved a little to easy at times, particularly I feel where schools are involved rather that clubs.
So what i ask for is a qualification that is worthy of the effort that you have to put in to achieve it, but one that is achievable within the club enviroment, particularly within the enviroment of the many smaller clubs that there must be within the country.
I want to achieve AD, I also want to know that I achieved a qualification that was worth the work, but as my previous post states currently AP2 is a major stumbling block.
Comments please ??
Regards
Mark
I wasn't advocating AD's should go down the SDC route again,
You seemed to suggest that these regional exped days would be mandatory. I apologise if I misunderstood. My point remains, by all means have a regional exped day if it helps, but don't make it mandatory and don't think it makes the instructor shortage in branches acceptable. I still think the Region should concentrate on enabling branches to deliver training to their members and not try to deliver it directly.
but that the advanced Nitrox qual should be a pre-requisite as OD's are to be taught it in the new year as part of the OD syllabus,
It's going to be optional apparently. Had BSAC not insisted on approved instructor status, ODs would probably already be Basic Nx qualified by default. Another example of the Region getting in the way of development I fear. Still it will be interesting to see what the new module entails and who will be allowed to teach it.
and as an AD you should be up to date with diving practices/advancements.
I thought AT2 was intended to keep people appraised of up to date pratices/advancements? Is there a problem with it?
I am not too bothered about Advanced Nx being made a requirement for AD. It increases the kit requirements and so the base cost of the course. Advanced Nx is a tool to fit a purpose and in this case the purpose is decompression diving. When you talk about BSAC and decompression practise in the same breath, there is incredible scope for improvement that does not require additional kit. It would be more attractive than a 6 page dive plan though.
I still think that having a regionalised one day training day would be good, along the same lines as the FCD expedition day,
It will suit some but not all. Personally I don't struggle to find boat trips, but I have struggled to find BSAC training at the appropriate time. I don't think we should or need to confuse the two.
and don't give me the bull about busy schedules etc.
You know what my schedule looks like do you? That would be no then.
It's a days diving. How many dives do potential AD's do a year?
The average in our coastal branch is about 50 a year across the board. I do about 100 a year and have done for the past 10 years. My limits are time and money with the majority expended on dives I want to do rather than training. If you can committ to a course a year in advance, fine I am very happy for you. Please don't try to tell me how to run my life though, I am quite happy with it.
and getting signed up towards a qual that you want.
AD is required to fill the DOs position. Very few people actually _want_ the DOs job but it is difficult to run a BSAC club without one.
Like I said earlier you aren't going to get it handed to you on a plate, earn it, do what's required of you and feel that you've deserved it afterwards.
You are talking to the wrong man. Frustrated by the logistics of BSAC Regional courses I turned elsewhere for my challenges. I did finally complete AD after 5 years, but more by accident than design. In fact the challenge and reward comes from the diving that I choose to do and which I have trained to do. I have no objection to people training as an end in itself, it just is not my reason for being in a diving club.
If you want things easy, join PADI, pay your money and get your qual.
I am quite embarrassed that someone working at regional level is willing to say that in private let alone public. Perhaps when your ego deflates a little we can have a worthwhile conversation. Had my BSAC branch not opened it's doors to PADI divers in 96 (prior to SALT) we would never have made it to our 50 year anniverssary. We have been quietly signing up PADI divers to BSAC ever since. Southsea Sub Aqua Club is a club for divers, always has been and we are proud of that. I don't care where our members get their training courses just as long as they are trained and competant to safely go about the diving they want to do.
So what if you might only get the opportunity three times a year. FCD practicals are only three times a year one in Scotland, one in Plymouth and one in Northern Ireland.
There's a glut of FCDs is there?
If those of you don't feel that the qualification is worth going for, then why do you all want it?
It's a condition of holding the DO position which is a condition of running a branch and going diving.
Look at it as a brainstorming session, if everyone puts forward their suggestions ideas etc, maybe some good ideas will come from it and ultimately improve the current situation
Research the problems, listen to the complaints and provide workable solutions. Please, no more bright ideas based on wishful thinking.
Come on guys what are your views.
What I want from the DTP/ITS is a scheme which provides BSAC branch members with the training they need, when they need it, without anyone having to sell their soul to BSAC. The branches have consistantly proved to be BSACs best delivery channel for diver training for 50 years. What the branches need from BSAC are the tools to do the job - courses that are attractive and sufficient members eligible to meet the training demand. BSAC courses should complement those of the other agencies not try to compete with or replace them.
Advanced (Tech)
Advanced (Boat)
Advanced (S&R/NAS)
Advanced (IT) [Would need to be an OWI]
All basic Advanced in the 1st instance, but splitting to
specialise in each area.
Hmmm. I quite like that. Subtle refinement, how about a core advanced which teaches the stuff we can easily do in branch and is ommitted from specialist courses - rescue, leadership, marshaling etc. In addition candidates have to provide proof of more advanced training, from BSAC or elsewhere. BSAC could publish a list of suitable qualifications and allow anyone that thinks they deserve it to submit their qualifications for consideration (to the region or whoever). It might be a techie course, completeing a seasearch project, a marine biology degree, dayskipper ticket, Lifesaver award, NQI, a photogtaphy award, NAS, expedition report etc etc. The possibilities are endless.
So
Advanced (Tech) Includes: Extended range and Introductions to
Trimix and CCR. Covers twins and stages etc in depth (sadly
lacking at the mo).
ERD was supposed to be the twinset course but proved unpopular. Twin sets are being picked up at Sports and DL these days. There is room for a SDC focussed on twinsets, redundancy and self sufficiency open to SDs. It's another area that many branches could easily cover.
If you think about it this isnt that far away from when we
had elective SDC's in the old syllabus.
The SDCs were not universally disliked. I think people enjoyed doing them. It was the getting on them that proved to be the hard part. We managed to run a couple in branch and they were very well attended. The format is quite affective. The problem was and still is accessibility. There are simply not enough courses convenient for members to satisfy demands.
Only this time the
resultant grade would actually allow you to do more.
I don't think it is essential to allow more. The training needs to be relevant and encourage longer term development.
Nigel Hewitt
25-10-2005, 09:48
The SDCs were not universally disliked. I think people enjoyed doing them. It was the getting on them that proved to be the hard part. We managed to run a couple in branch and they were very well attended. The format is quite affective. The problem was and still is accessibility. There are simply not enough courses convenient for members to satisfy demands.
I certainly would have no problems with SDC based courses but for just that problem. (IFC, PRM and O2 last year.) I started moving into BSAC with some enthusiasm a year or so ago but, I confess, the momentum is beginning to abate and my taste for 'set piece' dives on specific wrecks, often at trimix depths as they are more intact, draws me away more often.
It's a bit off thread but I seem to be reading a common tale through a lot of these discussions that it is hard to get the bits together to accomplish higher grades. This worries me. By all means set the standards high and make the courses and exams tough but don't make access to the elements hard. I like BSAC and my branch but I only need BSAC qualifications to be useful within my branch. I'm quite prepared to put out time and money but I'm not into banging my head against brick walls. I get the feeling that some of the contributors have felt that moving above DL rather involved a lot of that.
I can quite see that a lot of higher level stuff needs expertise that will not be present in all branches and I recognise that volunteer instructors have lives to get on with but the obstacles in the way of somebody moving all the way up to FCD should be acquiring diving skills not acquiring access courses.
Please tell me it isn't true.
nigelH
As per my previous post I believe BSAC should look at this problem with AP1 & AP2 and give some firm guidlelines or carry out an urgent review of the situation, I have read posts where people have had AI's that have signed off the training without being on the trip by getting reports from other AD's and DO's this seems unfair to me as not all AI's are interpretting things this way. I suggested that a DO should be able to sign it off as they alone are ultimately responsible for all diving within a club and for appointing dive organisers. Also what makes other AD's able to decide whether you hgave attained the requirements of AP2 being that the majority of current AD's will have completed the old SDC based syllabus and have not done AP1 & AP2 themselves.
BSAC should realise that there requirements of AP1/2 are unrealistic within the constraints of small clubs, without some degree of modification.
Personally I also have the added difficulties of a young family which makes it very difficult getting away for the weekend, both timewise and financially, this time and finance issue should not make it more difficult for some people to attain AD as it does others, the course should reflect your diving skills and knowledge and not your ability to have numerious weekends away from home spending money on hardboat trips, accomodation etc.
I fully aggree that AD should be a diving qualification worth acheiving as I personally feel that some of the lower grades are achieved a little to easy at times, particularly I feel where schools are involved rather that clubs.
So what i ask for is a qualification that is worthy of the effort that you have to put in to achieve it, but one that is achievable within the club enviroment, particularly within the enviroment of the many smaller clubs that there must be within the country.
I want to achieve AD, I also want to know that I achieved a qualification that was worth the work, but as my previous post states currently AP2 is a major stumbling block.
Comments please ??
Regards
Mark
Totally agree!
Taff
:=Saying that I do agree that AD must have a more intricate knowledge of Nitrox, so therfore should it be within the AD sylabus?
Eh? You agree that ADs should have the knowledge of nitrox, but don't think you should do it? There's no point putting it into the AD syllabus because the courses are already run... the Adv.Nx SDC... the one you don't want to do :O\
David
It is not a case that I do not want to do it verbatim. I just have to decide if it is the type of diving I wish to persue.
Furthermore I have to take into account my of my work, family and financial commitmants. Juggling act at the best of times!
Presantly the sylabus, IMHO, only goes into Nitrox briefly, I feel it should be more indepth. But no where does it state, if I remember correctly, in the old or new sylabus that I MUST complete a Nitrox Course.
I must have knowledge of Nitrox for planning purposes etc but will it make me a better diver to do the courses? I feel not. Will it make me more experienced Diver to be Nitrox trained? Will it make me have more kudos with fellow divers/trainees? only peoples opinon will tell!
IF BSAC reviews the AD sylabus and they deem that ADs must complete a Nitrox course then I will abide by it, if I wish to go further in my diving and instructing. Thats a desicion I will have to made at that time.
Regards
Taff
garethwoodruff
25-10-2005, 14:38
:=As per my previous post I believe BSAC should look at this problem with AP1 & AP2 and give some firm guidlelines or carry out an urgent review of the situation, I have read posts where people have had AI's that have signed off the training without being on the trip by getting reports from other AD's and DO's this seems unfair to me as not all AI's are interpretting things this way. I suggested that a DO should be able to sign it off as they alone are ultimately responsible for all diving within a club and for appointing dive organisers. Also what makes other AD's able to decide whether you hgave attained the requirements of AP2 being that the majority of current AD's will have completed the old SDC based syllabus and have not done AP1 & AP2 themselves.
:=BSAC should realise that there requirements of AP1/2 are unrealistic within the constraints of small clubs, without some degree of modification.
:=Personally I also have the added difficulties of a young family which makes it very difficult getting away for the weekend, both timewise and financially, this time and finance issue should not make it more difficult for some people to attain AD as it does others, the course should reflect your diving skills and knowledge and not your ability to have numerious weekends away from home spending money on hardboat trips, accomodation etc.
:=I fully aggree that AD should be a diving qualification worth acheiving as I personally feel that some of the lower grades are achieved a little to easy at times, particularly I feel where schools are involved rather that clubs.
:=So what i ask for is a qualification that is worthy of the effort that you have to put in to achieve it, but one that is achievable within the club enviroment, particularly within the enviroment of the many smaller clubs that there must be within the country.
:=I want to achieve AD, I also want to know that I achieved a qualification that was worth the work, but as my previous post states currently AP2 is a major stumbling block.
:=Comments please ??
:=Regards
:=Mark
Totally agree!
Taff
Its been a real pain trying to organise this, I have had to ask the Area coach who is kind enough to come along on a trip in November, Advanced Diver should be deliverable in branch, and the AI requirement makes it very difficult for smaller branches.
Gareth.
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.