Professional Recognition

[GKP]

The Air Transport Association of Canada managed a study into the Human Resource Development of the Commercial Pilot. One of the issues we are now wrestling with is to better recognize instructors but its not an easy task. http://www.atac.ca is where the study can be downloaded.

Any input on how we can better recognize professional instructors would be appreciated.

Also, we are in the process of working with our Civil Aviation Authority to better train and prepare Instructor pilots with more attention to the development of "core competencies" rather than meeting prescriptive based training standards and a flight test to a minimum standard.

Recognizing the important work many part time instructors do and who maybe specialist teachers of IFR or Floatplane flying or maybe only just instructing for the fun of flying; we do not want to snuff out this important segment of aviation with burdensome processes to be able to instruct.

The study also revealed that the Air taxi/Charter operators were less interested in pilots with 1500 hours total time with 1200hours instructing time, so this traditional route maybe less useful to pilot wannabees.

As an Association, group health plans, code of ethics have been developed to try and provide that better working environment to help instructor's satisfaction levels but recognizing the comments in the survey of satisfaction amongst instructors on another thread, is that there is a natural burnout as the job becomes repetitive, particularly if the instructor is only there to build flight hours and not really interested in the GA business, which I think is fair to say is most instructors...

So, in closing I look forward to hearing of ways such as the National Association of Flight Instructor's "Master Instructor" program as a way to recognize high quality flight instruction and instructors.

[StrateandLevel]

"more attention to the development of "core competencies"

Lets keep the technobabble out of instructing. Whilst pilots need hours they will instruct for nothing, the professional instructor is something of a myth because we cannot afford them; even the military can't afford them any more. Simple economics establishes the status quo.

It would be far more productive to conduct a meaningful training analysis for future pilot training; unless we establish what a pilots needs to know, we will never get the teaching right.

[GKP]

Well said, however, "Core Competencies is a concept started by the UK CAA and is being championed by Fergus Woods, formerly of the CAA now head of JAA.

It is also a goal of ICAO to overhaul the licensing standard and has been embraced by the Canadian CAA.

The goal is to have pilots/instructors do a skill with less emphasis on mandatory hours, such as 30 hours of dual time to become an instructor with government designed lesson plans. In other words, recognizing what the pilot needs to be able to do in the "real world" This means less "snapshot" type of judging systems such as a flight test in which navigation capability is assessed in 15 minutes against a minimum standard to more integrated training/testing element that is more school monitored.

[BlueLine]

I'd rather call it meaningless mumo jumbo!

Core - Horny capsule containing seeds.. central part cut out of..

Competence - Well you either are or your aren't!

No doubt this will be arranged by Experts!

where:

X = indefinate quantity

Spurt = Drip under Pressure

[GKP]

Perhaps it is mumbo jumbo, but it is important to be vigilent of these new ideas as a government can impose more requirements to improve safety at the expense of the vitality of the industry. In other words, over regulation improves safety by killing off industry...less flying...

But there is improvements that can be made to the training programs. In Canada, for years we concentrated on "spin recovery" As a matter of fact, about 6 hours of dual preparation was spent on preparing a student for a 3 minute testing element and it could not be identified that safety was improved. It was recognized by quite thorough analysis by our CAA that the focus should be on "spin recognition and avoidance" which does bring into play concepts such as situational awareness.

My original query was how better to recognize instructors as we are having that discussion now in Canada. Perhaps it can't be done but the discussion is worthwhile as the instructor plays an important role in achieving overall system safety..