jetcareers - View Single Post

MikeD · August 18th, 2004, 23:45

[ QUOTE ]
In the end, I think it probably comes down to the individual discretion of the instructor.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that if I really believe a student should know something, it's up to me to ensure that the student knows it. Part of the responsibility of being an instructor. If I'm doing my job correctly, that student will know more than just the PTS - (s)he'll know how to keep themselves alive.

When the student goes before the examiner, however, the student should be tested on those standards. If the examiner is doing his/her job, (s)he'll push that student to the very limits of his/her ability, and ensure that the applicant is indeed capable having that ticket.

I believe that the system, when used correctly, will turn out the product as it's meant to be produced. We, as instructors, are the line workers. we teach the students just about everything we possibly can.

The examiner? Well, that's quality control. The examiner ensures that the product meets the production criteria. The PTS is that criteria...Make any sense?

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree with concept, though IMO, the PTS needs some revision too. A little more focus on basics. Once the PTS can be modified, it can become the new standard. Until that time, I test and grade to the standard (PTS), but try to give that extra "food for thought" that a stud can take with them, if indeed they need it. IMO, studs should take some learning out of an evaluation, rather than it being a 2 hour stess situation that they were happy to be done with, LOL. It's like saying to the stud "yes, you meet the standard. The base knowlege is there. You're at the bottom rung of the ladder now, so here's some things to take out of here, and if you like, build upon them....it'll only help you in the future."

August 18th, 2004, 23:45	#24
MikeD Administrator Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Pinal Airpark Posts: 6,897	Re: Private Checkride question [ QUOTE ] In the end, I think it probably comes down to the individual discretion of the instructor. Personally, I'm of the opinion that if I really believe a student should know something, it's up to me to ensure that the student knows it. Part of the responsibility of being an instructor. If I'm doing my job correctly, that student will know more than just the PTS - (s)he'll know how to keep themselves alive. When the student goes before the examiner, however, the student should be tested on those standards. If the examiner is doing his/her job, (s)he'll push that student to the very limits of his/her ability, and ensure that the applicant is indeed capable having that ticket. I believe that the system, when used correctly, will turn out the product as it's meant to be produced. We, as instructors, are the line workers. we teach the students just about everything we possibly can. The examiner? Well, that's quality control. The examiner ensures that the product meets the production criteria. The PTS is that criteria...Make any sense? [/ QUOTE ] Agree with concept, though IMO, the PTS needs some revision too. A little more focus on basics. Once the PTS can be modified, it can become the new standard. Until that time, I test and grade to the standard (PTS), but try to give that extra "food for thought" that a stud can take with them, if indeed they need it. IMO, studs should take some learning out of an evaluation, rather than it being a 2 hour stess situation that they were happy to be done with, LOL. It's like saying to the stud "yes, you meet the standard. The base knowlege is there. You're at the bottom rung of the ladder now, so here's some things to take out of here, and if you like, build upon them....it'll only help you in the future."