Proposed extra college intake?

[wat tyler]

What is going on at the college? The courses seem to be haemmoraging people at the moment, which will doubtless be going wonders for morale, and they're talking about upping the intakes as a solution.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't NATS already train all the successful applicants they can find, I don't know of many (any) prospective students working in Kemble street etc waiting for a place to become available, as BA cadets were doing a few years ago, waiting for a pilots job, so surely the only way to increase the intake (in the shore term at least) is to lower the standards a bit?

Is this a case of "Throw more mud at the wall, some will stick", as this may be very true, there may be an increase in the numbers of candidates successfully completing their courses but at what cost? 50% plus failure rates and the associated devastating effect on the morale of the staff and students?

Maybe we should be looking at the structure, and more importantly the length of the courses, particularly the later ones. The Approach Radar course could certainly do with being a but longer, with a less severe learning curve. (When I did it, (twice I might add) we were still playing catch up during the assessed phases) The BA course at the end of the approach course could easily be moved until the end of the 1st 3 months posted "OJT" without too much fuss, allowing 10 days or so to be spread through the course for comsolidation.

[Bright-Ling]

Who knows what the answer is?

I spoke to a friend the other day who I was at school with.

He can earn up to £10000 per month.......working in PR.

OK, not my idea of a job, but goes to show the distractions to young'uns!!!!!

Nowadays, it is no longer the highly paid profession it was.......and less are interested in avaiation.

As for the quality of the College course and its Instructors........sorry.......off to the pub!!!

[Chilli Monster]

Maybe smaller, more frequent courses are the answer? Coach the strugglers through rather than dismissing them and chopping so many. Lowering of standards though ....... http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif

Had a guy today asking for traffic information on one of ours below an airway, then insisted on telling me about 2 non-conflictors more than 5000' vertically separated inside CAS. Nothing wrong in that (if you want to be that helpful) but he was having trouble stringing more than 3 words together when doing it. If that's the standard of U/T's being pushed out then you DON'T want to be lowering the standards ;)

CM


[This message has been edited by Chilli Monster (edited 22 March 2001).]

[BurndenCrashed]

I think it is about time that it is accepted that the college in its present form does not work. No institute of professional training which loses up to and over 50 percent of its intake throughout the lifetime of its course is simply not up to the task. I simply cannot understand why such a state of affairs is not addressed. Training for ATC need be no more attritional than any other vocational instruction if it is approached in the correct manner. Why, for example, are some students removed from training a mere 8 weeks into an 18 month course? There is no way that a fair value judgement can be made after such a short time. I appreciate that some people will not make it and in fairness to them training should be terminated immediately that this becomes apparent but such a decision cannot be made so early.
Also, the instructors themselves should take a long hard look at themselves and the job they are doing. At the moment they are failing in the job that is required of them. They are instructors and by definition should instruct. Some do not. They sit behind students, say nothing for the duration of a run, then write 2 or 3 words before disappearing off to the coffee room, no doubt for a good laugh at what such and such a student has just done. (I suggest they make sure the door is properly shut before doing this in future).
You could go on and on, but I think a debate on this subject is long overdue. It is owed to the high quality of applicant that NATS purports to attract. The CATC management has a duty of care to those it is supposed to be resposible for, I believe for some time now is has categorically failed to fulfil it.

[Bright-Ling]

Hmmmmm.........worms....can and opener.....!

CATC instructors are, on the whole, good at what they do

Unfortunately, maybe a third of them are has-beens or nearly-runs.

Some are sadly an embarassment to the college and the work of others. Students come on OJTI and say the same as you me and the long timers have said many times about these people.

People who haven't validated in many years.....some have failed at many units. Then, they bark at people as if they are God's gift. WRONG.

That don't impress me much (mmm, good name for a song.....) and they should go out and try and do the job.

Validating at a quiet unit 10 yrs ago is very impressive........to someone who doesn't know the job.

Why doesn't NATS/CATC management sort out the crap and give the college, and it's capable instructors some credibility.

THAT is one of the problems......the staff.

Flogging a dead horse or Nurturing someone through is a tough call.......but think about it.

Every chopped student has a 'hard luck' story or bitter tale to tell. Says a lot for CATC when validated people do too.

[This message has been edited by Bright-Ling (edited 22 March 2001).]

[CA1261]

Can't agree more with BL (hope TC are treating you well, matey! Got any airbag problems?!). I've been the bitter chopped cadet who has been lucky enough to survive the system & validate, and no-one I've spoken too understands the basic financial thinking behind it. If a £200,000 machine breaks down once, do you throw it out & start spending another £200K on a new one? Or do you spend a relatively small amount of time fixing it? Without labouring the point, why kick someone out after they've nearly completed their training after a long & expensive course with hardly a chance given to smooth out any wrinkles? The attrition rate for my course was (I believe) 44 started, 8 validated AC, 6 validated TC, 6 at airfields.
A small thought about CATC instructors (and I know someone, shortly to vanish from our midst & become one of the illustrious who believes he can change the system - good for him, hope the silver spanishmobile can hack the journey!): We all know that lots of the instructors have been there for years & couldn't validate *anywhere* "real". Why not make it compulsory for all instructors to stay in touch with the real world by limiting their contract lengths? Say, 5 years instructing followed by a minimum 2 years operational, then they can return to instructing if they wish? I know there are all sorts of logistics problems with family upheaval & so on, limited airfields in the vicinity of Hurn, etc, but WE NEED REAL CONTROLLERS TO TEACH US. I expect I’ll get barracked from instructors who say they do familiarisation visits regularly: Just because I’ve been on a HS125 jump seat doesn't necessarily mean I can fly the damn thing...
Many of the instructors are as BL says generally good at what they do, in fact they excel. But sooooo many of them are just hanging around on enormous salaries, the last time they actually controlled an aircraft was the mid-80s or earlier. The aviation world is so very different now, and the phrase “old dog, new tricks” has sprung to mind.
Rant over.

[Bright-Ling]

1261.....thanx!

Before any of the CATC mob hunt me down, please remember that everyone thinks that the majority of instructors are excellent, they really are. But even them have their hands tied by management.

Classic example was a guy on my approach course who was probably not tup to the job. He got to with 4 weeks of finishing without playing a joker. Needless to say, he lost said joker, had an instant recourse and failed again.

An assessor said that he should never of got that far! OK, probably true, but no-one either had the balls or "legal" right to chop him. He left the company and failed to validate as a Tower only.

Answer? Maybe the college needs more individualised training. Who knows? One thing for sure......the powers that be need to sort things out.

Yes, it probably is the best ATC College in the world. But that should not allow them to "rest on their laurels".

[Dreamcast]

I've travelled half way around the world 5 times sitting for testing and interviews only to be rejected at each interview as a "near miss", yet i was told i scored extremly high in the aptitude and computer tests and well in the personnel. I want to be an ATC more than anything. Watching and listening to ATC is an enormous buzz to me and i am willing to do anything to get on a course.

What i can't comprehend is how the Technical interview is suppose to assess your suitability as a "successful controller".

But who am i to know?

[BurndenCrashed]

BL and 1261,
Thanks guys for responding and starting an intelligent debate which I think is long overdue. Controversial though it may be to say, but I would like to take you to task on your assertion that the majority of the instructors are excellent. It is now some time since I went through the college so the personnel could have changed somewhat but in my experience I would say that the majority of the CATC instructors were simply not up to a standard required for such a specialised programme of training. We are constantly reminded as to how demanding the training is both to complete and instruct and yet CATC is staffed by those who, by and large, have been found wanting at some stage during their careers. Others are from 3 units attracted by the ATCO2 salary and the cushy number the college provides. I do not want to denigrate the efforts of those in situ, but I do think it is an issue that requires addressing. The statistics indicate that something must be done.

[Bright-Ling]

I honestly believe that there are some excellent instructors there. Simple as that!

In the last 3 years or son, they took quite a few people who are younger to help 'bridge the gap' if you like. The only potential drawback is that you get people who have done only one 'tour', so don't have a vast amount of knowledge. (BUT does that matter, as the instruction repeats every 3 months)

Wilst not wholly defending the college, they do have their hands tied by SRG/RGAT or whoever. For example, you must have at least 5 years Civil experience before you can instruct. That is crazy for a number of reasons.

1. An ex military controller I know wanted to go but only had 4 yrs civil experience so couldn't! (His 8 yrs RAF, including instructing didn't count!)

2. But, you can become an OJT with just 2 years (or in some cases, special dispensation for 1 yrs valid exp). Why?

If you can let people work off yr licence with live traffic after 12 months, why make it a 5 year rule for CATC??

Furthermore, it is the obvious fear that most, including me, would have of being able to validate again on rtn to operational duty. Therefore, people opt to bump up there pension and go near the end of their careeer = which sometimes means you get less enthusiastic bods.

Perhaps the BEST way is to have people valid in airfields doing a part time instructors role. After all, the AVC/TVC at LATCC has controllers helping out in the sims. What better credibility can you have? Maybe if the college was moved to LATCC (replacing the AC hole!?!) you could then have LL/GW/SS/KK/TC OJTI's giving REAL time instruction.

[form49]

"Those that can do, those that can't teach"

Not something that really applies to the majority of the instructors, but it does apply to a certain few who failed to valdate at units and were given the option of a quite time at the college for either their last few years or just to reacquaint themselves with the job they were truggling to do!

I think that the 5 year tenure at the college is far too long and as a result there are many controllers in "the real world" who would like a tour at the college but do not want to spend 5 years in a non-operatioal environment.

If OJTI's were "leased" to the college on say a 3 month basis, the students would benefit in having people with recent operational experience teaching them the trade they know.

There will always be a requirement for permanent postings at the college for say the basic aerodrome 1 and 2 courses and all of the classroom work. But the more complicated raar courses should be taught by people who hold a unit validation.

Burnedencrashed,
The lure of people to the college from ATCO 3 units is understandable more money and an easy life. People at ATCO 3 units move traffic in complicated situations on a daily basis they have the ability to pass on their experience to the students and should therefore not be criticised or in any way denegrated for wanting to further their careers. Many go to the colllege with a view to being posted to a 2 unit on completion of their tenure.

The college needs to look at each and every one of its instructors, put them out in the real world for a 6 week OJT and see how they cope, if they are cr@p then traiing needs could be identified and actioned.




------------------
Turn left heading 230, close from the left, report established

[Shazbat]

There used to be NOTHING wrong with the then "Cadetships".

Out of an average intake of, for example 25, 20 would not only pass the course first time (back then there were hardly any re-courses as I can recall) - but would also go on to validate at their final unit.

The reason ?

Well, to my mind, it's the operational experience that USED to be gained on the "Cadetship", where each discipline had to be "unit endorsed" before moving on to the next course.

What a great shame that management messed around with it, all because of COST. What a great shame we are now in the mess that we (NATS, sorry you other people) are in, because financial considerations took precedence over a well-tried and VERY successful system.

Hmmmmmmm.......happens a lot doesn't it.....GOD help us, then, when we are PPP'd.

[Fly Through]

Think Shazbat hit the nail on the head. The whole way the course is run now needs to be looked at. Not wanting to upset anyone but a certain other company seems to have found a better solution, if someone fails, post them to a unit, see if they got what it takes and then maybe offer a recourse. Also isn't it alot better to train from within, ie assistants, blippies than joe bloggs of the street? Can't believe I'm agreeing with Serco but sometimes they do get it right :)

[west country fatbloke]

I have to say that i am generally dissapointed with the standard of cadets coming from the college.
I personally think the standards have been well and truly dropped so that NATS management can say "look how many cadets we succesfully get thru' the college"-good pr!
I also am of the opinion that the generall standard of instruction at CATC is woefull-either thru' lack of exposure to the real world,lack of ability to instruct or sheer "i couldn't give a monkeys" syndrome.
I must say i would support the idea of a rolling three month posting as an instructor to the college for ojti's-i see far too mny cadets come to LATCC who haven't got half as much knowledge and skills that they should have due to the college's inability.
Anyway,i'm of to write my last will & testament now..

[BurndenCrashed]

Form 69,
I think in your post you`ve hit on the real root of the problem, and indicated to me that in my earlier posts the direction of my criticism was wrong. I am certainly not intending any criticism aimed toward ATCO3 units and apologise if that came accross from the post, having seen the situations which arise at these units on typical summer afternoons and the mix of traffic that is dealt with, they have my utmost admiration, it is the system itself which is the major problem. The fact that 3`s see a route to a 2 posting via the college is wrong ie the 5 years at the college becomes simply a means to an end. Are these people in the best frame of mind to instruct on a demanding vocational course? Maybe, but there must be an element of "clock watching" involved especially towards the end. A student with a mere 8 weeks to prove him/herself deserves better.
That said, I certainly do not blame those at 3 units for taking this career path toward a 2 posting. I apologise for my criticism of individuals in my earlier efforts, it is the system which needs replacing.

[2 sheds]

A few observations on the somewhat varied opinions above.
The "ex-grade 3 unit" or "ex-grade 2 unit" argument is quite irrelevant; the "2" units might be busier overall but tend to be the sausage machines, whereas the "3" units might tend to be quieter overall but expose the controllers to far more variety plus liaison with other units, notably civil and military in Class G.
There are numerous instructors currently at CATC who have been there less than 5 years, which is no longer a criterion for a posting - furthermore, there is now the start of a flow out of the College after 3 years, a reaction to the very real concerns about obtaining unit competency again.
Rather than this fairly concentrated snipe at CATC and some individuals there, the overall training system should be re-examined. This includes the selection process (if anyone really has been chopped after 8 weeks, this process must be in doubt), the individual courses (including, of course, the specific CATC aspects), the standards of OJT for students (not beyond criticism at some units) and the overall training system. On the latter point, what is desperately needed for many (all?) SATCs is an extension of the overall training period to include more time on units before Aerodrome training (ATSA duties?) and after courses for part-competency training.
The old-style cadetship had much to commend it - including, in those days, a logical progression of procedural control before radar control and primary radar experience before SSR.
Unfortunately, we are now seeing the result of putting cost-saving and expediency before thoroughness of training - not to mention the effects on any individuals who fall foul of the system and who could well become quite competent given a little more specific training, without the current rigid SRG restrictions.

[wat tyler]

Shazbat.

I quite agree with your post, the problem at the college is the way courses are structured, as the instructors, on the whole are good at what they do. Granted there are members of the foot stamping chip on the shoulder brigade, as well as the chair frightening chip in the stomach brigade, but you get those in any environment, and it's just unfortunate that some of them have arrived in the college.

Possible posting students to aerodromes following the aerodrome course for six months to a year, then back to do their chosen / allocated radar courses. (As I believe used to happen) The radar courses could be a fair bit longer without the "We can't have them getting too much practice" lot getting out their sandwich boards. The college is apparently going to early / late shifts to cope with the increased intake, and I would suggest that this extra capacity could be put to better use, by increasing the numbers of successful completions without the extra intake.

[matspart3]

I've been fascinated by anything that flies for as long as I can remember and 'fell' into ATC when I didn't get selected for a BA cadetship...(I failed the Literacy/numeracy/profile etc. selection tests which I would expect are similar to CATC's) I did 2 years as a Serco assistant before they sponsored my aerodrome course. The course was a piece of cake because I had relevent experience before I started the training. Same applies for APC and APR. With about a year between each course, I gained confidence and experience and passed both courses without major difficulty. I've been extremely fortunate to have had employers who have been prepared to invest many thousands of pounds in me and I received absolutely 1st class training at Bailbrook. (I don't work for Serco, they made me redundant after ADC when they lost the contract!).
The two points I'm trying to make here are: -
1. Selection. You need to pick the right people. The standard selection tests definitely reject some people with the 'right stuff'. Who cares if you can add 3+3 or if you like fluffy bunnies. My fascination with aviation means my job is vocational...in an ideal world, I'd do it without the money! How many NATS cadets (many of whom I've worked with over the years) chose ATC because of the generous 'training' salary and still don't know one end of an aeroplane from the other.

2. Experience. There IS no substitute for it. Shipping young people off to a college environment for a year or so then farming them out to the real world is probably why so many fail to validate. Non NATS units and, particularly everyones apparent arch nemesis Serco, have been training from within with a very high success rate for years.

[HarryBucket]

While it's true that all aspects of training need to be reviewed, not only the CATC aspects, the standard of insrtuction and understanding at units needs to improve.

OJTI's at unit need to underatand that they are being paid to "train" the newly posted ATCO both practically and theory based. It is not enough to give a trainee a pile of books and say "go and learn them", a task that the newly posted appear to be having difficulty with. Is this due to a lack of willingness to do the essential bookwork, or is it simply that after the introduction of GCSE exams and modular learning at Universities and CATC where the bookwork is more structured, that the students do not have the experience of learning in the "here are the books, learn them" way.

I am not for a minute suggesting that students should be spoon fed, but is it not the duty of the OJTI's to train, trainee ATCOs and not just "practicaly" train them?

Instead of bemoaning the passing of the cadetships, should we not have now accepted the way the College trains and mould the unit training to complement and enhance it?

[HarryBucket]

matspart3

How long can we recruit from within?

To me that is part of the problem with ATC courses and instruction. Until we recognise that it is not a crime to come into ATC without an aviation background and tailor the courses as such, there will continue to be a high failure rate. As much as ATSA's hate to admit it, they are a dying breed especially in airports as computers take over more of their roles, so where are we to get the recruits from within the industry?

If you want to be a banker, do you have to come from a banking environment or can you succeed after joining direct from school? When will we get away from the arrogance that our job is so special that only people from within the industry can master it?

We should not be continually looking backwards but forwards. Lets look at the way we recruit as well as the courses. Is there enough proactive recruitment or do we still expect the "right people" to come to us? The college's output is ultimately governed by the recruits it receives. We are always quick to judge and condemn but slow to suggest ways to improve.

Lets change that and support our colleagues, not undermine them.

[monkey boy]

Thanks Harry for more ideas.

Surely there are others with the required aptitude, but who have not heard of ATC. A better advertising system needs to be set up (How many people really read Fright? if they're not aviation connected) and as soon as we start to get suitable people from other sources, things may change for the better.

Maybe we should be advertising in other places than selected papers with a very limited run. If it really costs £thousands to train us up, then surely it would be a good idea to change the people that we aim the advertising at, we might have a better pass rate.

[This message has been edited by monkey boy (edited 24 March 2001).]

[Big Nose1]

Harry, Its difficult to tell from your profile where you are in ATC, but your post seems to suggest that bookwork is all important. As an OJTI at the biggest unit in the country I have to say

1/ most ATCO`s have forgotten more from the books than they care to remember

2/ one of the major failings of UT`s is the belief that they can learn from a book how to be a valid ATCO......what makes the job so rewarding for us and so difficult for trainees is that you can`t. Experience and a degree of natural flair is vital. So yes OJTI`s will train practically and rely on the UT to do the bookwork, with help from the mentor when required.

[HarryBucket]

Big Nose 1

I agree, ATC is a job where the bookwork does and should come a poor second to the practical work in terms of OJTI's input. The point I was trying to make is that, through talking to various trainees, OJTI's are not giving them the support they need to "crack" the books to pass the validation.

Unfortunately some OJTI's seem uninterested in helping with bookwork when asked, holding the opinion that bookwork is solely the responsibility of the trainee. All people learn in a different way and we shouldn't make trainees feel inadequate if they struggle with the bookwork or afraid to ask for help.

I am not suggesting we have study sessions etc, but simply asking questions of the trainee on a regular basis, questioning their actions to see if they fully understand the reasons behind their actions and continually challenge their decision making processess, can have a very positive effect. When one trainee I have spoken to, with 100hrs training, asked his OJTI to ask him more questions whilst at work, the OJTI replied, "I've asked you about 4 questions up till now in your training and you didn't know the answers, so I can't be bothered anymore." This is the type of attitude that I feel needs to be removed from the OJTI's if we are to see real progress in the number of validations. I'm glad to say, however, that these type of people appear to be in a dwindling minority.

[granny smith]

I've been away for a while but I've just had a read through a few fora and page 1 of this diatribe is the biggest pile of sh*te I have ever had the misfortune to waste my telephone bill reading. Where do you "experts" on training get your information?

FYI CATC training is justifiably regarded as amongst the best in the world - take note of the number of countries which have sent or want to send their trainees to CATC which, because of stupidity at the highest level regarding PSBR etc, has meant that CATC can't bid competitively for them (gasp, shock, horror - perhaps a BENEFIT of PPP?!).

Who says the Instructors are ogres, misfits, incompetents or clockwatchers? If I was an Instructor there I would be highly p*ssed off at reading such fatuous ill-informed b****ks. What RECENT experience have you had? From reading the posts I doubt many of you have been there recently.

Yes there are still a very few of the old guard there but the vast majority are highly capable, highly motivated, dedicated ATCOs and Instructors. The majority of the 'younger' ones seem to want to return to ops after their 3 year tour which means that they and their new units will benefit from their instructional time (how many of you know ALL the rules AND how to apply them?)If you are so concerned with the quality of training why don't you get off your fat a*ses and volunteer for CATC too? There is a constant stream on VNs on the intranet.

Remember regardless of how good the training system is, if you put a substandard raw material in you'll get a substandard product out at the end. From what I've picked up there are very few of the recent crop of failures who di not deserve to be recoursed/chopped. The system of 1 guaranteed recourse is a good one as the majority who fail first time round respond well to the retraining however I too am concerned with the prospect of a further lowering of entry standards.

I believe you'll also find that a certain other unit not far from Heathrow has been running with a far greater 'chop' rate than CATC for many years now. What has been done to improve the training scheme there?

The detached instructor (some of you would say that's the norm - but you're wrong) idea is interesting but very difficult to make work. I believe it is being tried with a couple of the new Area instructors retaining validations at LATCC. One of the many problems is how to maintain a high standard of instruction if the person is not fully familiar with the course design, airspace etc. CATC courses seem to be developing constantly - the new ACS1 course, changes to the ADC 2 course and I believe there is a new APR course in the offing too. I have visited CATC often and never fail to be impressed with what I've seen. The new and younger instructors have brought a breath of fresh air and operational ability to the place and there is a very different feel to it from my cadetship days.

Although I agree that the old cadetships were better with much longer training times especially on OJT with time away from CATC counted in months rather than weeks I doubt very much if there is any chance of going back to those days. Remember too that that system also had its drawbacks and faults. I think those who mentioned the recruitment problems have the right idea. It is at this stage that we need to establish the correct quality of applicant and weed out the also-rans. Incidentally, NATS doesn't advertise in Flight for Students - but perhaps that part of the problem.

There. I feel much better now with all that out my system.

[EF1 x2328]

You tell 'em granny!!!

After all, if I was at the college in yr office I would be P***ed off too.

[EF1 x2328]

See ya next week mate. My spies tell me you are back then....that is, of course, if I worked there (too!)

==========================================

King of Vectoring

[This message has been edited by EF1 x2328 (edited 30 March 2001).]

[EarlyGo]

Harry Bucket

NATS do advertise in the job sections of national newspapers (Daily Mail at least) and in the main regional newspapers as well. But they could do a lot more. When I was a student lots of companies had stands at our recruitment fairs, if NATS want to up their college intake by 50% that's the sort of people they have to go after.

[Vlad the Impaler]

As one of the current throughput at CATC I feel it's about time to wade in with my offering. I agree with Harry B, No need to have an aviation background to succeed. I came here with an aviation inspired childhood but absolutely no relevant experience and I am doing at least as well as anybody else. As for advertising, I wish I had seen it five years ago but I happened upon an ad in the sunday mail. The question of lowering standards at the college is difficult for me to comment on as I guess if it is true then I am one of them ! All I can say is that although some of us plainly do not have what is required, I have never seen anybody go down due a lack of effort, well there were a couple.......
On to the standard of instruction........
In the short time I have been at CATC, just on a year, There has been an influx of new blood. I would say that there is less dead wood and more enthusiasm than is being suggested here and within the constrictions of the current courses they genuinely appear to be doing their best by us. I am not saying that aren't genuine failure horror stories but on the whole those who go under had their chances like the rest of us and weren't up to the job.
As for the comment about being here for the training salary rather than a love of the job, Well, you are going to get a degree of that anywhere but please, don't drown in your own cynicism. If you want to make accusations like that then get down to Hurn and talk to some of us, Maybe you'll be surprised. Otherwise back off. Cheers. V

[Bright-Ling]

There is NO way that you are a real student......

I mean, posting here just before midnight.......ervyone knows that you should be in the Zoo.

Shame on you.

[Der SimMeister]

Students have been away, they are back tomorrow. Back to the grindstone!!

The Cage/Zoo are no longer... now renamed "Elements", doesn't have the same ring to it somehow.
It also incorporates a bar called "Circo".. rumours that they have made all their security staff redundant have yet to be proved :)


[This message has been edited by Der SimMeister (edited 01 April 2001).]

[Intel]

B-L
Get with the program. Just because you moved to TC doesn't mean you can forget your roots!!

[Bright-Ling]

I don't.......I do them every week!!!!!!

THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH ASH BLONDE HIGHLIGHTS.......come's to us all!

I think I am getting old......off down the 'Legion'!

[Spoonbill]

Having just spent a week down at CATC, it was no suprise to learn that the present failure rate is 65% amongst cadets.
This, as far as I observed, was down to 2 things:
1 - The attitude of the students; the vast majority of whom are capable of passing the course, but only a few are genuinely interested in doing so from the outset. Social life and minimum effort appear to take priority, ( a bit like the real world I suppose http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif).

2 - Instructors; In my humble opinion, few of the instructors are in touch with the real world, and even fewer provide a quality product, a quick look at the college sucess rate backs that one up.
I totally agree with the idea of instructors being made to work 'live' for a given period of time. Now that the simulators are capable of delivering "real time product", so should those who choose to instruct.
3 - CATC Management; They, are above all, are really responsible for the quality of the turnout of the college, and it is they who should be held to account.
End of rant. http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/eek.gif

[Spoonbill]

OK, I enterd three reasons, the ability to count was not a priority when I was doing my training. http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif

[Lardyboy]

Granny Smith, you were an instructor at CATC. If you had stayed on any longer you would have realised the extent of the problems regarding the quality of instruction. Unfortunately, most of the 'Old Guard' are still present, and do not accept the need for change. By the way, how is Heathrow Approach?

[Heading 365]

We can all hurl stones from a distance, but what are the problems?

Lack of current practice of some of the instuctors? They are so short of staff that they can't get time out and still meet the demands for student throughput (down to management that one). Short term detachments might be the answer.

Lack of incentive to get new blood into the place (until recently anybody on the top of the pay scales and working in the London area lost money) http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/frown.gif

Maybe the courses are wrong, are they trying to cram to much into a short time. Is it better to teach the basics well and let the units (some units aren't to hot)carry the training forward.

It all started to go wrong when a certain non ATC educationalist :mad: took up residence.

Still its a nice place to retire to, or maybe they should just shoot you if you can't make it anymore! ;)

Duck!! Incoming

Edited for the PPRuNe Golden Rule, no naming names unless you're prepared to do so yourself. It's your call.


[This message has been edited by PPRuNe Radar (edited 05 April 2001).]

Apologies got carried away!

Heading 365

[This message has been edited by Heading 365 (edited 06 April 2001).]