Question bank vs Learning

[Fabio1605]

Hi

I have my first set of exams fast approaching and i am starting to worry about the exam just "catching me out"

i tend to study and study and study, try a question bank and just get caught out on so many small details, or down to the wording of the questions sometimes

the last thing i want to do is learn the question bank's, at the end of the day if i am in an emergency i dont want to be sat there going, what are my 4 options!

But my question is how accurate are the question banks in relation to the actual exams at the moment?

What are everyones tips on studying? ATPL is 50% a memory game with so much information to try remember, i love learning but i find the ATPLS are such a memory game.

i have persisted to not learn the questions bank, but i am scoring 75-85% (borderline at moment) with 6 weeks to go and it would be nice to know the question banks are quite accurate, i am using a mix of atpl online and BGS for question banks

Subjects i am on at moment are Airlaw, HPL, MET(BEAST!) AND IFR comms

[Officer Kite]

Go on the questions. I have a couple of exams done and passed thankfully, other than to check something again (which most good question banks should provide anyway so you wouldn't need to), my advice is to leave the material.

Thins is, in 10 years time if faced with an emergency, a good 80%+ of the material is not going to be any use to flying even on a daily basis, for an emergency i can assure you that you will neither remember nor need anything much from the ATPLs!

If you want high grades, hit the question banks. If the exams I sat so far are any indication, then for a subject like mass and balance i had 1 new question, and for AGK (a very large subject - 80q exam), I had 10-15 new questions. Quite honestly, I wouldn't have passed without the question banks. I don't think any atpl student can argue otherwise. Reason being is that the questions are often stupid riddles where they're trying to catch you out and not see what you know. Another reason is the questions focus on particular ares, absolutely no point in learning the inner workings of shunt wound generator when the only question that may come up on it is asking whether the output when a load put on it increases or decreases, unless you want a sore head!

[Fabio1605]

Hi Officer Kite!

Thanks for response, i get mixed reviews people say dont learn the questions, your stupid to do it, then others say what you said.

So its really hard to judge what the best method is.

So when you sat your last exam a lot of the questions were quite familiar to you already?

I am happy to know the questions are similar to the real ones then i know i am at least on the right ball park.

I do find some stuff just over the top, like learning about the different numbers of fire engines at category airports, why do you need to know a category 4 has 3 fire engines or what ever it is, why not just look the information up in the AD or GEN if you need to know. little things like that really annoy me about the whole thing

[Officer Kite]

Yes, for well over 65 of the 80 questions on my AGK exam I didn't have to give it a second thought, I'd seen the questions before and just had to click and go. Was done the 2 hr exam in 35 minutes. Some say you'd be stupid to, but if you want to pass the exams themselves with the highest possible grades, then I'd say you'd be stupid to forego the question banks. For me at least I find the questions to be somewhat unrelated or different to the material itself, they can be so specific or focus on certain areas you may never have even considered during study, to the point that if you just studied the material you may as well be rolling a dice to get the right answer in the EASA questions.

[momo95]

Just study the question banks, of course make sure you understand the theories behind the questions, but base your study around the question banks!

[TryingToAvoidCBs]

This thread is very close to my heart.

As a student, I was always very passionate about learning. I wanted to know everything there was to know. I chose to do a residential course to maximise the information I could get access to. I refused to use the QB at all for the first 4 months of the course (we didn't actually even have access to it unless we payed extra, which I refused having already spent 5K for the course).

I did note however that those on my course using the BGS QB were getting much higher exam results than me despite not actually having a clue about 90% of the material. "The answer is B because I've seen this question 30 times already"....those kind of people.

I walked out of Ground school with an 88% average...one of the lowest in my class. But I honestly felt that I knew the material inside out.
I went on after my MCC to teach ATPL theory, both modular, integrated and for BSc (hons) degrees in Aviation Studies for over 3 years.

That was in 2011. How many of the students in my class who hit the QB hard now work for airlines? as far as I know..........ZERO.
There were a few in my class who did 50/50 learning, and of those about half have jobs, most within the corporate sector. There are only 3 from my class working for airlines (including myself).

Admittedly the market is much better now, so exam results are not as important as they once were. They are more (and have always been) part of a selection test to see whether you have the ability to learn a lot of information (relevant or not) in a short amount of time. This ensures you have the capacity to hold large amounts of information in your head, and that you are capable of passing a type rating. It is for this reason the airlines have generally seen ATPL exam results as an important recruitment factor.
Learning answers to the QB is not going to help you in the long run...In my opinion. But that depends on your academic ability.

Regarding Officer Kites comments, I would agree that as the QB have become more prolific, the CAA have been under a lot of pressure from the airlines to make the ATPL exams harder, in an attempt to minimise the "learning the answers" method, and increase the students requirements to "learn the subject".
Although I will openly admit they havn't done a very good job of it, and the students now appear to be more confused that at any time in history. Do you answer correctly? or answer what you know (from the QB) the CAA claims is the right answer?

I would also add in regard to Officer Kites comment "Quite honestly, I wouldn't have passed without the question banks. I don't think any ATPL student can argue otherwise", with all due respect you can't have worked particularly hard then. The ATPL syllabus is not difficult if you put your mind to it. I passed all mine without barely touching a QB in 6 months.

In closing, in 2017 the QB's are needed more than ever due to the confusing nature of the syllabus. However, please don't rely on them. Once you start a type rating, the skills you will have gathered from needing to learn how to learn will be very valuable. Especially if you're paying for your own TR.

Critical rant over.
Good luck.

[Officer Kite]

I would also add in regard to Officer Kites comment "Quite honestly, I wouldn't have passed without the question banks. I don't think any ATPL student can argue otherwise", with all due respect you can't have worked particularly hard then.

I actually had a good laugh at that LOL. Whilst not passing judgment on someone I've never even met nor do I have a clue as to how hard they've worked, I can assure you I have worked my socks off since starting here continuously. There is also a mental rollercoaster attached to the ATPLs from all the stress, fear of failure and there are times when it gets a bit much. As most other students, I put my heart and soul into this. I therefore highly suggest you bugger off with that nonsensical and baseless judgment and get off your high horse.

Back to the OP. We started off with AGK, it is a rather detailed subject, that is where the challenge lies. I started off literally writing out detailed notes of everything, I refused to move on unless I knew the topics inside out, started with airframes, then onto gear systems, hydraulics etc ... all was OK until we hit electrics. It just didn't click, I wrote out enough notes on A4 pages to compile a mini thesis ... then i tried the question banks to see where I was at with regards the official exams (no point knowing it if you can't pass the exam stuff) ... I was failing quite regularly or getting mid 70s. Others in my class who were not doing much other than the question banks were passing the school tests and this was all being sent off to our airlines. My flatmate did nothing other than the question banks and was flying high in our airline's eyes.

Then, anyone with a brain, would do something about it. And this is why I offered the advice that I did. I changed my approach and used the question banks as a study method, now when I say used the QBs, I don't mean I memorised the 1629 answers in the AGK bank, I mean I based by study off the banks. If I answered a question right - great, if i got it wrong - i looked up in the explanation why I was wrong. Bit by bit it all started to come together in my mind. I passed AGK yesterday with 87%, I am quite confident that I had a decent enough understanding of it, and there were about 10-15 new questions I mostly got right to prove that. It is also impossible to memorise every question, there are some in which scenarios are given and you must state if 2 statements are correct or incorrect, there can be hundreds of these in a bank - you must understand the theory behind this for example. And also there are some questions which just do not make sense - you tend to remember these anyway.

Best of luck!

[paco]

With reference to relevance, one of my ICAO conversion students just pointed out that the trip he just did from Mexico to Moscow bore no relation at all to the Performance/Flight Planning exams - neither did their flight planning software so it all had to be done by hand. It gets worse......

[TryingToAvoidCBs]

I therefore highly suggest you bugger off with that nonsensical and baseless judgment and get off your high horse.

I can assure you there are no horses in sight.
The comment was based on the way your statement was worded. I've seen hundreds of students over the years claim they couldn't pass without the QB, and I've known for a fact that their comments were nonsense. They couldn't pass without the QB because otherwise they would have to work 10 x harder than they were (which wasn't a lot) and they weren't willing to do it.

Right or wrong, my comment was based on experience. I apologise.

Which brings me onto your next comment(s).


"If I answered a question right - great, if i got it wrong - i looked up in the explanation why I was wrong. Bit by bit it all started to come together in my mind".

"You must understand the theory behind this"

"I started off literally writing out detailed notes of everything, I refused to move on unless I knew the topics inside out"

I couldn't agree more with everything you've written. I told my students exactly the same thing. Some listened, some didn't. Those who didn't generally failed.

As I say, my GS was done over 6 years ago, a lot has changed since then.
I have a personal hated for all QBs. Always have, always will.
But reluctantly I do understand their importance more and more in recent years, and their increase in popularity and perceived need.

As a friend of mine used to say "Do what you want, I've already got my licence"

Best of luck.

[Officer Kite]

fair enough then, I apologise for my rather negative reaction, seeing someone state I have not worked when this stuff has literally taken over my life and I've put so much dedication into it since starting just hit a nerve.

OP I think you have enough information now!

[VariablePitchP]

Officer Kite,

Careful of overstating the bank, it’s easy to exaggerate how much of your exam was actually from the bank...

You said you knew the answers to well over 65 of the 80 questions in your AGK exam, leaving 10-15 you didn’t know.

If we conservatively say there were 13 questions you had to answer, that’s only 16% of the paper you actually had to answer. As in 84% already in the bag (a good pass).

As you got 87%, that means you got 3% of that final 16% correct which is less than 20% right. The exam is 4 question multiple choice so by answering blind you’d get 25% (you’d have got 4% of that 16 correct). That means that despite all the studying and work you put in you actually did worse on the questions you had to answer than a dog trained to hit A repeatedly would have.

So either it was maybe half bank and you got a decent score on the second half or... (hopefully less likely!) you have negative AGK knowledge :O

[banjodrone]

You would probably learn more about flying by reading the numerous books by highly experienced pilots such as Barry Schiff. I don't think the point of the ATPL theory is to impart knowledge anyway, it's been serving some other function. Hopefully the newly revised content will be more relevant and interesting.

[paco]

Don't worry, banjo, it will! They are getting away from training for modern technology with Sopwith Camel thinking. But bear in mind that, although a lot of stuff has been cut, a lot of stuff has been added as well.

[rudestuff]

It's been a few years now, and I realise things have changed, but I found the questions banks essential.
The first thing to accept is that you are not going to remember most of this stuff. It is a mid term memory test designed to keep pilot numbers down, and make sure that only the dedicated get through. The volume of knowledge is far too broad. The majority of it is not relevant to a type rating course. They will show you how to turn on the INS and the Air conditioning packs which is as much as you need to know.
Hopefully it has changed, but I found there were numerous examples of where two answers were correct, and you need to know which one they were looking for - the only way to do that was through question banks. Since the aim was to pass the exam, my strategy was to learn the question bank first and read the books second to consolidate my knowledge. I was training to be a pilot, not an aerodynamicist, a doctor or an electrician. My advice would be to find the way to study that gets you through, but work smart, not hard. It's all very noble wanting to have a deeper understanding of things, but you are training for an EASA licence. It's an EASA exam. If you can pass it then by definition you know enough. Trust me, it won't feel like you know anything but you have the rest of your career to study up.

[superflanker]

Ok, but let's be honest. In subjects like meteorology you can study, then go to the QB and score 75-85% without problem. You understand one idea and with this you can answer lots of questions. But in subjects like air law or OPS... 200 page manual each. You learn all about ETOPS and Air spaces and then they ask you about the colur of an AIC. Come on, nobody can expect this.

[Alex Whittingham]

To be fair, LO 010 08 04 04 says "Explain the organisation and standard colour codes of AICs".

The problem here is that for years there was only a loose association between the LOs and the exam questions, in fact the first question bank was, I was told at the time, written without any reference to the LOs in the Aviation Law subject at least. Over the years questions outside the LOs have been taken out and new questions that have been added were an attempt at being sensible.

Despite acknowledging that the current LOs are not really fit for purpose and initiating a review (to which Paco is contributing) EASA's latest instruction to its 'Subject Experts' is to make sure that every single one of the LOs (that they admit are defective) is now tested. Hence the silly questions.

[superflanker]

To be fair, LO 010 08 04 04 says "Explain the organisation and standard colour codes of AICs".

You are right, perhaps i have to look more to the LOs. Anyway, the "study vs qbank" thing its ok in some (probably most) subjects. In other ones, question banks are without discussion the most efficent way of studying.

[Fabio1605]

Hi, I couldn't agree more with the superflanker.

The topics like meteorology, human performance, onces that make use of actual thought process i find i do better on a brand spanking new mock test.

Subjects like Air low, ops there just a :mad: memory game! with questions full of surprises to catch you out!

Someone please tell me why its important to know what annex dangerous articles comes under, when there is a contents page at the beginning if you really needed to know!, its rubbish like that that i just do not see a point in learning.

[mgahan]

The question trainees, particularly those just starting out on an aviation career, need to ask themselves is, "Am I studying to pass an exam or am I preparing myself with knowledge and understanding so I can operate in the aviation environment with safety and assurance?"

I'm sure I'd rather have the pilot of my aircraft or the controllers separating it from others to have passed their exams and tests by applying knowledge of the subject and not remembering the answers to stock questions.

[Fabio1605]

I want to learn the material, but the questions can be so irrelevant .

Please tell me why you need to know what annex contains information about personal licensing.

I would rather spend my time learning relevant material, then what part of the operations manual contains information on the height and width of registration markings. i mean come on, seriously... i would much rather my pilot is checking the engine components and systems then measuring the height of the registration markings of planes, then checking annex 7 to make sure they comply.

[Officer Kite]

I'm sure I'd rather have the pilot of my aircraft or the controllers separating it from others to have passed their exams and tests by applying knowledge of the subject and not remembering the answers to stock questions.

I wouldn't recommend flying in that case

[superflanker]

I'm sure I'd rather have the pilot of my aircraft or the controllers separating it from others to have passed their exams and tests by applying knowledge of the subject and not remembering the answers to stock questions.

What is the difference between "applying knowledge" to learn the wake turbulence separation minima and "memorizing" the wake turbulence separation minima?

[Officer Kite]

While I'm at it on a slight tangent, why does VFR and IFR comms need to be two separate exams? Why can't it be one exam with two sections?

The cynic in me says the answer is obvious ... everyone knows the exams are money making machines :hmm:

[paco]

VFR and IFR comms will be combined in the future, as well as adding KSA 100.

[paco]

I don't think the KSA 100 thing has been though through properly at all, and it is more geared to big organisations.

[superflanker]

Sorry, what is KSA 100?

[paco]

Knowledge, Skills and Attitude.

[Rottweiler22]

I finished my ATPL theory exams early summer, so I know very well how this works. Bear in mind that I did the ATPLs before they introduced these new questions with lists, typed answers, etc, but at this time I have to say that the Bristol Ground School question bank was absolutely bang-on. AGK, Comms, Air Law, and General Navigation were (a few months ago) 90% from BGS online. The rest of the exams were slightly less, but all had a considerable amount of questions that I'd seen before on the question bank. Personally, I think I could have scraped over the line without using a question bank, but it wouldn't have been pretty, and it would have taken considerably more time and effort. That being said, some people absolutely hammer the question banks, and still scrape over the line, or even fail.

At the beginning of my course, there were a few people who made a point of "I'm not going to use question banks, I'm going to read the textbooks inside-out and know the content...". As honourable as their intentions were, they were the lowest scorers in the first set of exams, and they soon realised that question banks were they way to go if you want a decent average. A few sly remarks were thrown around between individuals at ground school, such as "You only got such a high average because you did the Bristol question bank from day one..." or "I got a 10% lower average than you, but I actually know the content, you just know the question bank...". I just feel you should do what ever is necessary to get the highest average possible, and give yourself a bigger feather in your cap. There's nothing dishonourable about it, it was the way it worked.

In my experience, the relevant stuff comes in when you do your practical flight training. There were some truly ridiculous questions that were more pub quiz questions than ATPL theory. Particularly in HPL, Air Law, and Radio Navigation. There's no relevance in knowing what a "first group" is, when the Chicago Convention was signed, or what types of atomic clock a NavStar GPS has. Easy marks, I admit, but completely irrelevant.

[paco]

"I'm going to read the textbooks inside-out and know the content...".

Of course, whether they can actually do that also depends on the quality of the study material. The Peters software stuff, for example (i.e. Boeing/Jeppesen), is appalling.

[superflanker]

CATS study guides for Air Law and Operational Procedures are awful. For Met. and human performance they are OK. With the new Quadrant questions I don't know if this guides will actually be useful.

God I am so stressed :} .

[Piltdown Man]

The reality is virtually nothing learnt to pass the exams will be used when you get a job. It can all be forgotten as soon as you have passed the exams. But the best way to pass the exams is to learn the wretched rubbish and test then your understanding and knowledge by using the question banks. Doing it the other way around will guarantee too many of you will fail because you don't understand the subject. This will become apparent when the the Campaign change the wording or values in 'known' questions or, rather sneakily, introduce new questions - how underhand! This is why the Alexs and Pacos of the world are worth their weight in gold.

[Rottweiler22]

I agree with Piltdown Man. I saw many a student (mainly middle-eastern sponsored students) not do a scrap of work, but cut through 500 or so Bristol questions every day. Safe to say, some failed miserably. Even comms.

I reckon the best way to learn would be under an instructor in a bona-fide ground school, highlighting the key points in the textbook. Go over the content in the evening and summarise your highlighted points by making footnotes. If you're lucky enough to have questions in the books (like the CAE Oxford books), do those after each chapter. If not, try to refine a search on BGS to what's specific to what you've just covered. If you get any wrong, don't just tick the correct box and think "I'll remember next time...". Make a point of going back to the text and reading why you had it wrong. Maybe even highlight it in a different colour. With this method I think you get a lot of information in your head to fall back on, whilst learning how to tackle the horrible, snidey questions that do pop-up. That's what I did anyway.

The worst example of quite literally learning the question was a very common in Air Law. In the question was a description of a certain type of airspace, the aim to determine which it is, and we were taught to count how many times you see the words "VFR" or "IFR". From how many times you saw these words in the question, you could work out which was which by just remembering the rules. Class C was 8 times, Class D was 6 times, E was 4 times, F was 5 times, or something like that. Please, god, don't quote me! It was the worst demonstration of teaching and learning to exams I saw in ground school. Bloody funny when it came-up though ! :D

With the old questions, you had the ability to just hammer the question banks and still pass. The new-style questions force a student to actually learn the content, which will no doubt take much more time than before. When I was at ground school, even with the question banks, it was studying nearly ever day for six months to get through all 14 exams of the ATPL theory. I could count on one hand how many days I had off without opening a textbook in that time. Could it be the case that the length of groundschool needs to be lengthened to fit-in more study time?

[dl_88]

hey guys, it will always be the case of not enough time in the groundschool portion. It’s always on the airlines timeline, you can get longer ground school but at the expense of a job.
14 exams to be cleared in 6 months or so, honestly unless you are a blinking genius, it won’t work trying to fully understand and at the same time pass the exam.
you can do the combination of both and best done in a group. When the dust settles, for the questions that is still giving you trouble, you can go ask the instructors to explain.
Have a working knowledge initially, you can continue your professional advancement on your own once you get the job. all this studying is all on you. Time management too

[paco]

As has been proven many times, you cannot pass these exams on knowledge alone.

[Northern Monkey]

There was a guy on my course 11 years ago who decided he wasn't going to use the question bank on principle and, lo and behold, got the lowest score out of everyone.

The bottom line is this. You have to do everything you can to maximise your chances of getting a job at the end of the course. A righteous sense of moral superiority is not going to repay your training loan, or buy you a house, or pay for your childcare. This is the real world.

Use the question bank and don't feel bad about it. If the CAA gave a :mad: they would do something to shut it down. But they don't, and neither should you because a large proportion of the material is information that is going to be useless to you and will be quickly forgotten.

Keep your head down, do what you have to do to pass with a clean sheet. There are no extra marks for being a goody two-shoes.

[Officer Kite]

Not the pompous opinion about the matter that some on here seem to take, one of which aimed at me that I chose to ignore cos it didn't deserve a reply it was so nonsensical. The post above however is bang on the money.

If you want to get 90%+ as an average, well you wanna know the question banks inside out. And no, no amount of "study" of the books in a 6 month period taking on 14 topics in depth as per the syllabus is going to put you in a good position to sit any exam without using the bank - to suggest so is blind ignorance. Know what you need to - the questions that will get you your license.

[paco]

And that's the point - you need to study because the interviewers won't be asking multi-choice questions, but you need to use the banks to get the licence. Given the way it has been implemented, I see no problem with that. After all, every school has their own progress tests and you need to think round the material in many ways. If the job had been done properly in the first place, we wouldn't be having this discussion, but you still owe it to your future passengers to study the material and know what you are doing.

It comes to something when a CFII who is also a heart surgeon and a Merlin pilot with a degree in aeronautics cannot pass them without using the banks, both of whom have been through here.

[Officer Kite]

Questions banks were always a must and the recent new questions that came out over the past few years confirmed it. Dubious English, sometimes very unclear questions and even less clear answers available.

Again this is exactly it. I used the question banks a lot, after having a look through my books to get an idea of the topic and build a mental map of the sections and concepts, I then used the banks in order to refine this knowledge to effectively apply it to the EASA questions.

When I and I think many others say to use the question banks, we do not mean to memorise 3000 answers for one sitting - no. What I at least mean is to be familiar with the sort of questions they ask on a particular topic, and you do that with the bank. I was able to score high marks in all tests, not because I had memorised the answers (I forget most, except for the crazier questions that seem to stay in mind), but rather I have learned the material through trial and error with the question banks and seeking to understand why I was wrong if I got a question wrong. Over time you do understand the topic quite well (unless you aren't trying to see why you're wrong). I would say I have a decent understanding of all the topics I just passed, I know full well that when the questions popped up on the screen, I wasn't asking myself "where have I seen this and what was the answer", rather I understood the topics and was able to answer it anyway, and where this was tricky with multiple correct answers, seeing it before and knowing what the examiner wants from you helps sometimes.

To sum it up, question banks help you refine the topics and concepts you really do need to know and that get asked most often. Without such a guide you couldn't possibly narrow down your study to what is the most important.

[paco]

I think that just about sums it up......