I've been enlightened...

[ScoutFlyer]

I've been instructing for over a year and a half, and have accumulated around 250 hours dual given. Not a lot by any standard, but enough that I thought I had a good idea of what I was doing. All that time I was instructing primary and instrument students. This summer, I decided to take the leap and get my MEI rating. Boy am I learning A TON about instructing. I don't know if it's my instructor, or the nature of the rating, but I am finding out just how little I actually know. (not that I thought I knew a lot to begin with ) I almost feel like I was working on my initial CFI again. I expected to learn more about multi-engine stuff, but I'm learning an incredible amount that can be applied to any type of instructing. Anyone else have the same experience?

[shdw]

Originally Posted by ScoutFlyer

I'm learning an incredible amount that can be applied to any type of instructing.

I have not had the same experience as I haven't gone for II or MEI yet. But if you have the time I would love to hear some of the new things your learning with this rating, maybe they can help me. Thank you in advance.

[mojo6911]

Its always good to learn more and exciting to add more ratings to your certificates. Good luck. Don't let the student kill you.

[moxiepilot]

I've found it's taken me about 1,000 hours of dual given per each instructor rating to get really good at them individually.

I taught for about 750 hours on my CFI before I got my II. That proved to be an excellent foundation for handling students in actual, with a calm demeanor and knowing how to work with ATC in actual, with a student.

While I've accumulated about 115 multi, I haven't found myself striving for the new rating yet (demand, money, etc.) However, I'd expect the same progression (for me) - about 750 - 1000 hours before being quite good at doing what we do

[ScoutFlyer]

Originally Posted by shdw

I have not had the same experience as I haven't gone for II or MEI yet. But if you have the time I would love to hear some of the new things your learning with this rating, maybe they can help me. Thank you in advance.

Most of what I've learned deals with lesson organization and how to build on different areas of learning. One example deals with definitions. I used to always include definitions at the beginning of the lesson so that the student had a little background in what I was talking about. My MEI instructor suggested using them throughout the lesson, to introduce the topic they deal with instead of all lumped together at the beginning. This makes it more meaningful to them because there is a purpose to the definition and they know how it applies. It is little things like that, that I am picking up more than I have before.

[shdw]

Thanks again, he gave you great advice! This form of organization keeps the brain on one topic at a time making the understanding of ideas presented easier and nearly eliminating the chance for interference. If you come up with/remember anymore keep posting them so we can all learn from it.

[ScoutFlyer]

Another idea dealt with cruise performance. How many times do you cruise to the practice area just guesstimating the cruise power setting? Why not photo copy the cruise chart from the POH and insert it on the kneeboard or checklist. That way when performing the cruise check, the student can just get a quick, but accurate cruise power setting. Much more beneficial to the student and airplane than just guessing.

[shdw]

That is an interesting idea, I will certainly have to try that next time I have a commercial student.

[mojo6911]

Originally Posted by ScoutFlyer

Another idea dealt with cruise performance. How many times do you cruise to the practice area just guesstimating the cruise power setting? Why not photo copy the cruise chart from the POH and insert it on the kneeboard or checklist. That way when performing the cruise check, the student can just get a quick, but accurate cruise power setting. Much more beneficial to the student and airplane than just guessing.

Probably a waste of time. The truth is, unless you are familiar with that aircraft's flight characteristics, you are always guessing. The older the aircraft, the more of a guessing game it is, as far as TAS, fuel burn, etc...

[shdw]

Mojo: You crush my hopes and dreams of ever being able to get the student to understand the aircraft!

[amjon]

Originally Posted by ScoutFlyer

Most of what I've learned deals with lesson organization and how to build on different areas of learning. One example deals with definitions. I used to always include definitions at the beginning of the lesson so that the student had a little background in what I was talking about. My MEI instructor suggested using them throughout the lesson, to introduce the topic they deal with instead of all lumped together at the beginning. This makes it more meaningful to them because there is a purpose to the definition and they know how it applies. It is little things like that, that I am picking up more than I have before.

Actually if you go based on brain research, they should be introduced in the previous lesson. It takes our brains 24-36 hours to process information to make a "folder" for new topics. We cannot learn without having something to hook the information to. The more background knowledge you have before a lesson, the better you will understand and retain new material on that topic. Vocabulary is a good way to start the process. Also, most people have to hear something 40X to retain the information (for adults more can probably be done internally by the student than children, but repetition is still critical). Those with learning disabilities/ lower IQs require more. Those with higher IQs can retain in less. So, give it in the lesson before, review at the beginning and continue to go over it.

[ScoutFlyer]

Originally Posted by mojo6911

Probably a waste of time. The truth is, unless you are familiar with that aircraft's flight characteristics, you are always guessing. The older the aircraft, the more of a guessing game it is, as far as TAS, fuel burn, etc...

This is entirely true, but at the what I like about this method is that the student is making an effort to fly the airplane by the charts, instead of making stuff up. Whether or not the charts are accurate, is another question. But they are using the best information they have. Depending on how long you are in a cruise configuration, this could also be pointless. But I thought it was a unique idea nontheless.