First Time Pass Rates

[sally at pprune]

I'm in danger of becoming a one issue person. I've had several e-mails about first time pass rates - some saying they agree that they should be public knowledge, others cautioning reading too much into them, as there are several factors affecting the stats ie beware comparing apples with oranges.

I got some "unofficial" feedback from a guy at the CAA today. He told me that the national average first time pass rates are about:

JAA Exams - 72% (ie 72% or all exams sat result in a first time pass)

CPL Skill Test - 65% (ie 65% of all people who take it pass 1st time)

IR Skills Test - 56% (ie as above)

He was a little vague - I think he was quoting from memory rather than a record.

Now I'd like to know how the schools I'm considering measure up against these figures. I think I'm intellegent enough to interpret the figures.

Am I wrong to get exited by this?

Should there be league tables?

Do the CAA have a right NOT to publish the stats?

There must be schools out there who are beating these averages. Why don't you publish your results like OATS do for groundschool (but not flying tests for some reason!)?

If you are going to the Flyer Exhibition tomorrow, why not ask the schools what there averages are? I will!

[Gin Slinger]

I can only comment on groundschool as that's the stage I'm up to, the most important factors are the individual's own intelligence, commitment and perseverance in determining the chances of first time passes in all subjects.

I'm personally doing my ATPL's with Bristol, which is widely acknowledged to be one of the very best groundschools, but I can tell you that matters diddily squat if you don't get your head down!

As for flight training, I couldn't comment having not done any, at least at the commercial level. One observation I can make from taking the PPL/IMC, is that a) the qualities of the individual instructors is important but b) as with groundschool (and in exactly the same way), you make your own luck.

Last thing I've got to say is something I've heard from many sources and have believe more and more as I've got more aviation savvy is don't believe the sales and marketing BS that's often spouted. They're after your money first and only. Period.

[MAX]

Sally,

Dont get too hung up on statistics. Theres a lot to be said for hard work and determination with a bit of luck thrown in.

I studied ATPL's correspondence with a now defunct school and completed CPL and IR with a relatively unknown little school. First time passes all round pleased to say. Got my first job within 5 weeks, (although lost it now). :(

Im a strong believer in word of mouth and recommendations from previous students. Not wether the school claims to have a 100% pass rate, force feeds you, overtrains you, overcharges you, wont have a beer with you......... get the picture.

Sometimes you need to follow your gut.

MAX:cool:

[Mach the Knife]

I studied the ATPL Nav, Tech and Perf A with Bristol Groundschool and have nothing but good things to say about Alex and his team, all passed on first attempt. Went to Airways Flight Training at Exeter for the IR, again very pleased with their efforts helping me to pass first attempt in the minimum off time. :)

[sally at pprune]

Thanks guys (and those who e-mailed). I don't think that average results are the be all and end all. The comments about it being down to you arew totally valid. But the constant is going to be me - I'll work as hard as I am going to work wherever I study. I'd just like to make sure I'm going to get the best chance of my hard work paying off.

Sure, there are many factors to be considered when choosing - price, location, customer service, atmosphere, whether there is any added benefit in the name/assistance getting the JOB. But the quality of training must be one of those factors and it one of the only ones that is measurable. except we, the consumers, are not allowed to know the stats.

At the Flyer Exhibition today I asked every school present for their results. None of them could or would answer me with accurate figures. I got the impression that most don't even measure them themselves. Sounds just as professional as the Bristol baby heart surgeon.

[OneMileHigh]

Sally,

you really have this thing about stats don't you. They are pretty meaningless: Take a well known school that doesn't solely rely on airline sponsors. They take on students from all walks of life and from the brilliant to the downright thick. I'm sure that many would try and dissuade the second type, but at the end of the day the schools have got to keep taking on, and if Mr Nice but Dim has the money and won't say no, well..............

Anyway, some will pass all exams first time, and some won't. What relevance do stats have in the above case.

I would suggest you make your shortlist of preferred school and visit them. You've already said you're an intelligent girl so I'm sure you'll see through any hype and bull***t.

All the best in your endeavours

[Flying Lion]

I don't know if you visited the Stapleford flight Centre/ London Guildhall stand but they were quite happy to quote. London Guildhall 72% first time passes, Stapleford with 100% first series pass rate on CPL and 96% first series pass rate on IR over the last 18 months. (and they take people from all backgrounds)

[mboulton]

Well said One Mile High you got it in one. I and my colleagues have performed miracles in the past and I am sure you have done the same.

[sally at pprune]

One Mile High

You may well have a point - I do have a bee in my bonnet about this. But believe me, if I am ever able to get an answer to what I thought was a fairly straightforward question, pass rates will only be one factor in my decision making.

I am not long out of the education system (yes I know, you can tell). League tables are all the rage there. They suffer from 3 weaknesses:

- The input standard varies so, of course, the output standard varies. What should really be measured is improvement of performance rather than absolute performance.
- Many people do not interpret the figures to take account of factors like the one above.
- There is a temptation for the schools to chase the measure rather than concentrate on getting each pupil to realise their potential.

That said, at least there are measurements, which can be very useful with sensible interpretation.

Flying Lion

I confess I was a little rushed at the show. My impression is that London Guildhall's course is tied to a degree. I have spent rather too long in higher education, so I gave them a miss. I notice they quoted first series pass rates to you. Forgive my ignorance, but is that the same as first time pass rates? Must compare apples with apples!

If anyone else is following this discussion, this thread is relevant, especially page 2

(click here) (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=50051&perpage=15&pagenumber=1)

[sally at pprune]

Hey Visual

If you find it "meaningless drivvel" and "boring", why read it? I've confessed I may be spending too much time on this one issue. I've also owned up to being new to all this. But I have some important decisions to make & want all the facts before making them. At my age, this is one heck of a lot of money to spend and I cannot afford to spend it in the wrong place.

This all started because one school makes a big fuss about their groundschool results (but is reluctant to talk about flying results). But I had nothing to compare those results with.

For me this is important, so not a waste of time OK? If you read this, which is clearly not important to you, 'tis you who are wasting your time.

Please don't put down someone who is asking genuine questions.

[sally at pprune]

Accepted ;)

I don't think I'm going to get the answers I've been seeking here, or from the majority of the Schools. You are probably right; there are more important things to worry about. Ultimately, the only first time passes I'm interested in are my own! For the record, I've recieved an e-mail that points out that there is a difference between first series passes and first time passes for flight tests, but there is only one way of measuring ground tests. And it is not necessary to do a degree if you do your training with London Guildhall/Stapleford.

Thanks for all those who have taken the time to respond constructively to my questions. Time for me to shut up!

:D

[GonvilleBromhead]

Hi Sal,

Pure hard work and graft will get you through any of the decent groundschools, simple as that. Look at the advice given on here regarding which ones are considered decent by a lot of folks, take it from there.

Go and visit the schools, look at their material, chat to the students and instructors. I believe that's at least (if not more !)as important as looking at the stats. I appreciate you want to maximise your chances of success, but don't be overly concerned on the stats, if you work (as I'm sure you will) you'll be fine wherever.

I guess in trying to find the best school for you is kind of analogous to wondering when to put in for the exams when you are coming to the end of the study. You want every single factor to be in your favour but there never quite seems a time when you feel absolutely 110% ready for them but you just have to bite the bullet and do it and make sure you're ready.

Good luck but to re-iterate what others have said, if you work, you'll pass. :)

(Edit: Posted same time as Sal, don't want to be seen to keep on banging the same drum ;) )

[fibod]

Hello Sally

Sorry I didn't see this before. I'm (still) an Oxford Flying Instructor.
I would agree with a lot of the advice you've received about not getting too heated about the stats. However although I don't have the accurate 1st time pass rates I think you've been fed some duff gen.
First groundschool. Not my territory, but my understanding is that there is not a school on Europe, let alone the UK that can better the OAT pass rates. That's why the others wont publish.
Second flying. Ignore Rolling Circle. He left Oxford in a bad mood a little over 2 years ago and went to work for the CAA. He has not recovered from his mood and spends a lot of time damaging our reputation on this forum, usually after pub chucking out time. If his employer knew his identity, I guess his job would be on the line - just as those of several of his ex-peers at Oxford lost their jobs last week not helped by him. Beware Chris. The real pass rates can be got from the Head of Training. His name is Jeremy Smith and I suggest you call him. I can tell you that the CPL rates are excellent following our new course introduced last year. The IR rates are far better than RC suggests - get the facts from Jeremy.
I'm often critical of my employers, but if you venture down here, I suggest you speak to our students not marketing. They pass their tests, they get jobs (even now) and the generally enthuse about the training. If the Company treated them a little better, there really would be no choice.
To strike balance before anyone accuses me of propaganda, look carefully at Bristol Groundschool and Bristol Flight Centre for the IR, or WMU for an integrated course if you can afford it. And when you have done, get down to CTC where several of my ex-students have gone and are now flying RHS in Jets as a result.

Above all, do not let the negative people grind you down. You've displayed plenty of intelligence and pluck just on these forums. Attitude is as important as ability and you have plenty of the first.

:D

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

The stats Sally would be pretty meaningless if you could ever get them which you never will.

For example - Exeter take a huge proportion of ex-Mil guys doing quick conversions. Most have 1000+hrs and full service wings - they tend not to fail. The training there is punchy done in minimum time. You might look at their stats and think thats the school for me when really it might not be. Excellent school though it is.

Similarly you might compare Jerez with CABAIR. Jerez don't take modular students and as integrated students have a slightly better first time pass rate their stats would look better when in fact the school itself might be the same or worse than CABAIR.

You might look at a school in Humberside that does maybe 20 IR's a year and compare it to another school in Leeds that does maybe 100. The small school stats might well be very skewed either way by having just half a dozen Dimwits or Yeagers through its doors that year.

Another school might combine tuition with Air Taxi operations and many of its students might go there in the hope of gaining an air taxi job after training. Many of those people might be instructors with say a years flying behind them now wanting their IR and a first non-instructional job. Therefore this school/air taxi outfit might well have stats that show its students have a very high first time pass rate. The fact that the average student had 800hrs P1 before starting - that their course took 3 months instead of weeks because the aircraft were always being pulled off on charter - wouldn't show up in your stats. It might look like a good school on paper but would not suit you at all.

Its a very difficult choice to make but the raw RESULT stats would be useless unless you also have the INPUT stats. Which you can't nor the CAA can really get in any meaningful way.

Concern yourself more with accom and travel costs, price, aircraft and instructor availability, location and customer service. Talk to students if you like.

Perhaps more useful - talk to your PPL instructors... we tend to know which schools are currently hot, and for what type of student...

Its easy to email me...

Good luck,

WWW

[ILS27R]

What WWW is saying here is that Statisitics is the Science that tells you if your head is in the cooker and your feet are in the freezer, you should be nicely warm!! :D :D

[Megaton]

Also check that when a school achieves a nn% first time pass rate, do they tell you how many hours each student is averaging before achieving that pass. Given enough hours before the flight test I'm sure many more people could achieve a first time pass.

[MThead]

Good point Sal

Not THE most important factor in your (our) decision-making process, but from my point of view the more info you have before committing upwards of £50k and the next two years of your life, the better.

I was also a bit surprised at the attitude of almost all of the training orgs at the Flyer show last Sat on employment. V few - only one in fact - could give any idea of how many of their trainees got jobs post (f)ATPL training, and in what sort of timescale. The preference was again to refer to your own aptitude, abilities & hard work. Fair comment, and there are no guarantees - accepted. But if sponsorships are no more, and may not return to past levels, perhaps the eminent schools could give some thought to what Mr Bank Manager (or even Great Aunt Edith if ur that lucky) will be asking hopefuls when they go cap in hand.:)

[Send Clowns]

MThead

I am afraid it would be impossible for most schools to tell you about the success or otherwise of graduates, MThead. In the case of my current employer we don't have any graduates of our full system yet. Previous experience is that many students who have left don't keep in touch - even to the extent of the school never knowing their results if they only take groundschool with that FTO. Then it depends on what timescale - the graduates of the last 5 years or the last 6 months? The latter would have a rather low employment rate I fear.

The statistics would be skewed to become meaningless, even more so than the first-time pass rates. In the same way as pass rates employment depends on the idividual, the person's character, background and contacts, even desired career (some don't want an airline job) more than the school he or she attended to gain the same, approved-course frozen ATPL.

However I do think first-time pass rates, suitably judged with conideration to circumstances can give a useful idea of some of the qualities of a school. There are many other qualities you should consider against your own personal requirements, but I think you are right to ask the question, Sally.

[rolling circle]

Sorry fibod - not even close. And it's nowhere near pub chucking out time, not in this part of the world anyway.

[fibod]

Yeh right - I see you have removed that rather obvious e-mail address. Just remember its people's jobs you are messing with. Many of us have secretly enjoyed your Management bashing. But the industry is in a mess, and no school can afford the negative PR from your poison pen at the moment. When I see your friends and mine lose their jobs, it has gone beyond a joke.

[Send Clowns]

Now I notice that Oxford are advertising their pass rates here, with suitable apologies to Scroggs/WWW if I transgress, I will talk about Bournemouth's (if this is a problem, please remove this post and email me, guys).

Groundschool figures for Bournemouth Commercial Flight Training are not available, as we are just starting in that area. Mostly the same team of instuctors using the same notes and course structure achieved a high pass rate though with a self-selecting student body (no sponsored students) under SFT.

Bournemouth Flying Club which now owns BCFT has been giving commercial training for 15 years. The pass rates achieved at CPL and IR have been excellent (I cannot give figures, I am groundschool). For the most important pass you can get, the first-time IR, the rates are I believe comparable to the big schools - Cabair, OATS etc, in the 70s% range. Now considering BFC has had no sponsored students, so no selection by aptitude tests, and considering the relatively low cost of the course, I think this is remarkable.

However, remember what I said before about taking this as only one factor in your choice! Go and see a few schools, talk to instructors and if possible former students.

Most of all, the thing we all need : Good Luck!