I only used the exam answer sheet/book as I said, as a reference source for topics to be studied. (FE/GR and ex C.of Papers)
With the current situation that is probably the ony way in whch ground instructors will be able to get sufficient information to advise their students how to prepare for the new exams.
Keith, what's missing from the above is our most important thought, that is the student and potential PPL. As discussed elsewhere, a simple question bank would suffice, similar to the FAA. Instead from October 1st we are presented with questions in Nav., very different, complex and importantly, not relevant to the PPL course. As I say, imagine you are a student PPL and when asking about the ground school element of the course, are told that 1)We are unsure what the syllabus is (apart from the FCL ref.),and 2) You have 9 exams, parts of which we
can't be sure what to teach or self study.
As I said in my previous post, I am not arguing that the current situation is good. It is not good at all.
And then you say "the industry" will catch up"! So we can't recommend which books to study and we don't know how much formal ground school to give.
You can advise your students to look at the syllabus and prepare for the worst case scenario. Basically they must be ready to face questions on all parts of the syllabus as published. They will of course be totally unimpressed with it all. Ground instructors should take the same approach in deciding what to include in their lessons. If an instructor's reaction when seeing a new question is to say something like "Strewth I can't answer that one!" then he/she is not ready to teach the material.
Finally, we are told informally that the PPL course is to be reviewed next April, and you wonder why steam emanates from my ear lobes.
I do not wonder about it at all. I can fully understand why people get wound up about it. But the syllabus is not actually new and everyone appears to have been quite happy to ignore its limitations in the past. The only thing that has actually changed is that the fools at the CAA have started to examine a much wider area of the syllabus. The fact that seeing what is actually in the syllabus did not cause their alarm bells to ring does not surprise me at all.