I tend to disagree with both BPF and PAX.
Talent, in most fields, is massively overrated. It may make the difference between being world class and world leading if you've trained for years, or useless and mediocre if you've just started, but for most people it's out effort and dedication to becoming good at something that really makes the difference. I think I have two natural talents - annoying people, and working hard. The first I've tried to temper, the second is the only one that's ever really made much difference to my life. I was a mediocre engineering student - and now have a PhD and various awards and books to my name, and I was a mediocre student pilot - and now have a CPL and assorted ratings, with 400 flight test hours. It was wanting something enough, and working hard enough, that got me to something that could be labelled "success".
Coaching an established professional - yes, they know where they're good and bad, and need feedback on the stuff they want to improve above all else. All fine and dandy. But when most people are learning - doesn't matter what, whether it's flying or Jiu Jitsu, they need positive re-inforcement. Not just for motivation (although that matters, and let's remember boys and girls - those students pay our wages, so we'd like them to keep coming back for more), but because if you don't tell people what they're doing right - how do they know to keep doing it that way?
So no, I don't agree with BPF that only negative feedback matters. The majority of students, most of the time, need positive re-inforcement of their good flying, AS WELL AS correction of their faults.
But, realistically, most adult teaching environments have these faults - not just flying.
G