Originally Posted by
43Inches
My take is the introduction of competency based training, which over complicated the learning process in an activity that needs clear safety focus, simple objectives, not 100 competency items. Not saying that competency based training is a bad thing as a concept, just that it took an activity where instructors often trained to "are they safe" standard, focusing on making sure they were able to survive, then CBT adjusted that to a set of numbers means they are safe, they are good to go, numbers all say they are safe, here's a licence. So it was all about poor implementation. Added was the drying up of experience in GA and that experience not being passed on to the new generation of instructors, so the concept of what is safe in regard to those numbers was also lost. We have all these MOS, pages upon pages of what should be done, where and when, and look at the result... Over complicated, result, people dying. The rule sets were never about safety, ever since Seaview it's about being able to prosecute and protecting the regulators arse from litigation. It was always amusing when one of the first things brought about with CBT, was the student signing the bottom of a page full of competencies after each lesson, in a statement that they have received training and agree with the instructors assessment and comments. After all a learning student is going to understand all the numbers and complicated statements regarding what they just did, half of which was a blur to them in cognitive overload....(sarcasm)
Personally, I believe that CBT is an excellent concept.
But…………….Not here!
I agree with what you appear to be suggesting, that is that CASA have no clue about what CBT really means, how to design it and how to regulate it.
The MOS (all of them ) is a joke. It appears to be a made up list of subjects written by lawyers. Look at any MoS - it’s not about delivering the best training in the best way, so that the student has an effective learning experience, it’s about regulatory @r5e covering!
I haven’t seen a single well written MoS.
So yes, I believe you are right when you suggest that we need to go back to basics.
In my view, this all stems from a regulator that doesn’t really understand its role anymore, and one which appears to have stripped all experience from its ranks.