PPL Exams - to debrief or not to debrief?

[Grob Queen]

Hi All,
I took my first ground exam today (Met- which I passed- whew!)

However, our Ground examiner said that he could not debrief me on those which I answered wrong, except for that dreaded Metform 215 scenario question on whether you should fly given the wx from the chart or not (which I did get wrong!)

He thought this was ridiculous. On debriefing with my FI later on the questions which I thought I got wrong and debriefing as well as I could remember them, I mentioned this ruling too. He also thought this was barking!

So I was wondering, is this a general rule that ground examiners must not debrief their students. What have others come across or what do you examiners/FIs think about this, as it seems as it is an arcane ruling. Does anyone know the rationale behind such a ruling? I'd be interested to know! My inexperienced brain tells me, well, how is the student meant to learn and improve if they are not debriefed properly after the exam? :confused:

I'd much appreciate your thoughts! Thanks :)

[blagger]

It is true that ground examiners are not supposed to go over individual questions, I believe it is paranoia about the questions and answers getting leaked. However, I do "know" examiners who give it a stiff ignoring so as Not to miss the teaching opportunity with the student

[Whopity]

It is true that ground examiners are not supposed to go over individual questions, No its not, Guidance for Examiners is provided in Stds Doc 11 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_lts_StdsDoc11_v9.pdf) para 2.10
This states that the Examiner should indicate areas where weakness has been found but should not discuss answers to specific questions It is perfectly possible to debrief the candidate regarding an area of weakness without giving them the answer to a specific question.

[peterh337]

Interesting... I was told in the PPL and the exam could not be discussed at all.

[blagger]

Whopity

Perhaps I am being thick but I said "not supposed to go over individual questions" and you quoted "should not discuss answers to specific questions " - what is the difference?

[Grob Queen]

Another point which I forgot in my OP was that he only felt he could debrief me on the Metform 215 question as this was perhaps the one which mattered most and therefore the one which I needed to learn from.

So Blagger and Whopity, I understand there are issues concerning questions being passed on, and this rule is to safeguard that. Also seems quite sensible that the examiner is allowed to debrief the candidate regarding an area of weakness

So I wonder, is it a local rule do you think that my examiner would not debrief at all on any of the topics apart from just that one specific question?

[G-F0RC3]

Well done on passing your Met exam! :D

I don't really understand the argument of a question's content being leaked. All the FTO needs is ten different papers for each exam and those being tested cannot prepare for a specific question - surely? Given such a scenario it would seem like a very poor strategy to prepare for a specific question when you can be 90% sure that it won't come up (for example). This would remove this perceived problem and the examiners would be able to discuss specific questions.

:\ Or am I missing something... ?

[riverrock83]

Ppl exams are provided by CAA and my understanding is that there are 3 versions of each exam available.
Would be a waste of money to create 10 options.
But congrats GQ on your pass!

[Whopity]

Indeed there are only 3 papers for each subject. Traditionally, every year a new paper was produced and an old paper withdrawn. Quite often the same question will appear on more than one paper. When the CAA became short staffed the papers ceased to be changed annually.

When I became an examiner I was taught that I should debrief all ground exams,
if you are also the instructor, as many examiners are, you are going to refresh the areas that the student fails in. All the guidance says is that you should not give the students the answer to the specific question, i.e you don't read out the answer off the marking paper but, if its a fact that they don't know, you are going to reiterate the knowledge to them because as an instructor that's your job.

The CAA talks of standardising foreign examiners but has actually failed to standardise any of its own examiners over the last 12 years!

[BEagle]

The recommendation not to debrief exam questions which had been answered incorrectly, even though the candidate had passed the exam, appeared in the last revision of the Standards Document. Before then it was:

Failed exam: Give the candidate an idea of which topics need more work.

Passed exam: Go through the answers with the candidate and ensure that he/she understood why he/she hadn't got the answer correct.

I continued with that policy whilst still an Examiner, giving the stupid 'no debrief' recommendation a stiff ignoring. As did every other Examiner I knew!

[keith williams]

The standards documents have no legal authority. They are simply advisory. When those relating to ATPL training were reissued a few years ago the ground examiners tried to treat them as if they were regulations. After a good deal of argument one of the FTOs threatened to take legal action. The CAA then admitted that the examiners had been wrong to do so. The attempts to use them as regulations then ceased.

In addition to this, as BEagle has pointed out on many occasions, the word "should" means that the material is merely advisory.

This entire problem has been caused by the fact that the authorities are too idle to produce a sufficiently large number of examination papers. There is no good reason why the exam candidates should suffer because of the idleness of the authorities.

[peterh337]

The attempt at security seems a bit daft given that the exam papers are held potentially by every PPL school in the country.

It's different for the Gatwick exams, whose gradual "leakage" involved complicated steps by the FTOs involving a man standing outside with a clipboard, and asking each candidate to remember 2 specific questions, and it still took them years :)

[BroomstickPilot]

Actually, no Peter, it didn't take the FTOs long at all to build a prirated list of questions in use.

If I recall correctly, in the early 2000s the Gatwick ATPL exams were held every eight weeks, in effect six times annually.

In 2002, (when JAA exams had only recently been introduced,) the total question bank across all fourteen subjects was no more than about 7,000 questions.

Each student was asked by his/her FTO to remember four questions, rather than two, so an entry of 12 students would come back with 48 recalled questions from one sitting. The remembered questions were then collected by an FTO instructor who was actually waiting outside the examination hall.

The instructor would then add the questions to the FTO's database and the students would be taken through all the questions on their return to the FTO as a teaching exercise.

Within months there arose a black market in lists of pirated questions complete with 'correct' answers identified. The only trouble was that the same question sometimes had different 'correct' answers according to which list you looked at. In short, even the FTO teaching staff disagreed over which was the correct answer, which says a lot for the quality of the questions.

It should be noted that questions for each subject were produced by a different member state of JAA in their own language and then translated into all the other various languages of the JAA states.

Eventually, students in either Denmark or Belgium, (I forget which,) sorted the issue by obtaining the entire question bank under their national 'freedom of information' legislation and made it freely available to all. That was the end of JAA's attempts to keep the questions secret.

Regards,

BP.

[peterh337]

One has to laugh :ok:

On top of that, the CAA (and a few but not many) other countries' national CAAs, weeded out a lot of the seriously bad questions.

So the post-FOIA question banks, which are used as the basis for today's online question banks such as e.g. flyingexam.com, are actually rather harder than the real exam questions. I found the CAA's JAA IR exams significantly absent in the "crap question" department, in 2011.

Back to PPL questions, I found them very close (year 2000) to the then issue of the PPL Confuser.

[S-Works]

I always give my candidates a debrief after the exam, how else are we supposed to benefit learning otherwise?

I tend to make the student research the correct rather than give them the answer.

I don't think the 100rs is that bad. By the time you go with the self study, a classroom top up and the exam paper across 7 subjects its easy to fill.

[Grob Queen]

G-Forc3 and Riverrock, many thanks for your congrats!! Feels good to get the first one out of the way:)

So,
I don't think the 100rs is that bad.

Am I to understand from this that students should have at least 100hrs of studying? is this before each exam, or total? This is the first I have heard of it. Or is it maybe a local rule for your FTO Bose-X? Not that its an issue for me...I must have so far clocked up well over that....the amount of time I spend studying! :hmm:

[S-Works]

Its a new requirement under Part FCL that students must complete 100hrs of study towards the PPL theory.

You have just made my point that across the 7 exams most people will have done the 100hrs of study.

The argument is more going to be around how this is actually captured.

[riverrock83]

G-Forc3 and Riverrock, many thanks for your congrats!! Feels good to get the first one out of the way:)

So,


Am I to understand from this that students should have at least 100hrs of studying? is this before each exam, or total? This is the first I have heard of it. Or is it maybe a local rule for your FTO Bose-X? Not that its an issue for me...I must have so far clocked up well over that....the amount of time I spend studying! :hmm:

The 100hrs (total) comes from EASA: AMC1 FCL.210; FCL.215 (see discussion here (http://www.pprune.org/flying-instructors-examiners/493964-compulsory-ppl-theory-knowledge-required-easa-ppl.html)). However the word "should" is used - so its a recommendation rather than it being mandatory.

I haven't done any classroom sessions at all - just read the books (AFE/Pratt), then had a go at AirQuiz and a series of practice papers from OAA which were leant to me as part of my revision before sitting the tests. I've now done 4 exams (passed first time) and am ready to do the others (with a little bit of last minute revision). I suspect that I will have done no where near the 100 hours study time unless I count sitting on PPRuNe...
The only briefings I've had from my club were before flights and informal chats about specific things (easier for someone to show you how to use a circular slide rule...).

I suspect no one will ever count how many hours you do unless you do an intensive 1 week course. All schools will probably do is set a recommended amount of time for each subject - they wont ask you to keep track of how much time you actually spend on self study.

[Whopity]

Eventually, students in either Denmark or Belgium, (I forget which,) sorted the issue by obtaining the entire question bank under their national 'freedom of information' legislation and made it freely available to all. That was the end of JAA's attempts to keep the questions secret.
Just before the JAA folded, the CQB had been given to a new State that had achieved JAA compliance. The man at the National Authority to whom the CQB was given, left the Authority and the CD disappeared with him. I suspect that was the source rather than any freedom of information request.

[Grob Queen]

I haven't done any classroom sessions at all - just read the books (AFE/Pratt), then had a go at AirQuiz

This is exactly how I study Riverrock. I study using Pratt, some added textbooks from works library and informal chats to my FI and other pilot friends within the club and outside. I also use the PPL Perfector for practise papers. This way certainly works for me. You mention that you are learning in a club environment rather than a "school" perhaps this more "laid back unofficial" approach which both our clubs have to ground study is part and parcel of learning at a club. Personally I think this is a great way to learn...formal classroom teaching would be far too much like going back to school!! :(

I suppose if the 100hrs was made more formal, the way to capture it would be in a logbook much like the flying hours..... but if it were to be brought in it would need to be for brand new students - not those of us who are nearing the end of our training!! God knows how I would capture all my hours spent at a desk with a textbook! :ooh:

[BillieBob]

However the word "should" is used - so its a recommendation rather than it being mandatory.Rather more than a simple recommendation, I fear. Under EU rules, if an AMC is published is is considered to be the only acceptable means of compliance unless and until an alternative is accepted by the competent authority. As Whopity has pointed out elsewhere, an alternative means of compliance is specific to an organisation - just because ATO 'A' is allowed to use it, there is no guarantee that ATO 'B' will be also.

[pudoc]

Some examiners debriefed mine, some didn't. The ones who did were actually the CFIs.

[Grob Queen]

Many thanks for your replies all...

...so it seems then that the rule to not debrief is currently only "suggested".... and its my misfortune to have an examiner who plays by the letter of the law!

[Whopity]

It may have something to do with how long the Examiner has held an authority. I suspect that most of the long time examiners will debrief as a mater of course. Some examiners are even known to leave the papers lying about and nothing ever happens to them. Only recently, I heard of a case where someone reported exam abuse to the CAA and their reply was "we are not interested in Club politics!"

[Grob Queen]

"we are not interested in Club politics!"

LOVE IT!!:)

Unfortunately Whopity, I think you may have hit the nail on the head with your surmise :hmm:

GQ