Mastery – What Should you Expect from a Tech Instructor?

I was chatting with some friends on the west coast recently and we got into a discussion about technical diving education and whether it is in a state of decline, quality wise, like recreational diving (arguably). This got me reminiscing about my experiences in the past as well as some of the things I’ve seen other people experience.

I think back to my experiences as a tech student. Even though I learned the skills and was able to not kill myself or my buddy, I quickly learned that there had to be something more than my current performance. After a hard look at my skills, I quickly realized that I should not be diving on helium to 200+ feet, regardless of certification. This started my journey, my search for mastery.

We tell prospective students that it is the instructor who makes the class and not the agency. Arguably, this holds true. Many new technical divers rave about their experiences with the class and instructor. But I always think to myself, how much of this is the new student not knowing what they don’t know? How do they really know that their instructor and class is “All that and a bag of chips?”. What have they seen/experienced to be able to judge? What is their criteria for making such claims? In essence, how do they know if their instructor(s) are demanding full mastery of the skills/education in their class?

Ultimately, the student must not only research instructors, but they must be able to determine the level of mastery that they are seeking from their instructor. Students must demand more from instructors. They must demand, up front, what level of mastery will the instructor hold them to. Does the instructor view the agency standards as maximum or minimum standards? What performance requirements will the instructor hold the student(s) to for the skills? What “extra” criteria will the instructor evaluate me on, if any? Will the instructor share the agency course outline with you prior to class? We tell potential tech students to research their instructor, but give little support as to what type of questions to ask and what kind of qualities to look for. This was my frustration when researching tech instructors a few years ago.

So how does this relate to the question I put in the subject line? In my opinion, I do feel that there isn’t a huge push for mastery. Many instructors view classes such as Advanced Nitrox/Deco Procedures as entry level technical diving. Instead of viewing these types of classes as a small piece to a much larger picture (i.e. trimix, cave, exploration, etc.). Every instructor will have their own style, but I feel that “checklisting” skills, flashcards, not teaching problem recognition, and allowing mediocre performance is hurting technical diving education, overall. Tech instructors must demand more from their students than what is written in the standards. Everyone will agree, that technical diving is a very, very demanding activity. Why shouldn’t the training be equally (or more IHMO) demanding? The checklisting of skills makes it difficult for students to retain the urgency of many of the skills required. Scenario training and realism are the keys to divers retaining the urgency required for performing these skills. In order to accomplish this, tech instructors must become very creative when planning their classes. This keeps the instructor on his/her toes as well. In my opinion, the use of flashcards robs the student of essential problem recognition skills required to quickly identify and solve problems. They also become a crutch for instructors as they may rely to heavily on them as “teaching aids”. Technical divers must be thinking divers and creative thinkers in order to solve problems to make it home safely.

Dive Safe,
Duane
Precision Diving