PPL theory exams UK - how are the new exams?

[B61]

Any feedback as to how students are doing? Or examiners?

I am a ground examiner but haven’t seen any students since the e-exams started due COVID so have yet to have a chance to use the new system!

[Aware]

Any feedback as to how students are doing? Or examiners?

I am a ground examiner but haven’t seen any students since the e-exams started due COVID so have yet to have a chance to use the new system!

I’d like to know too if at all possible.

[MrAverage]

You may both want to look at my post number 1826470 on a thread on the "other" forum. It won't tell you how the actual exams are but will be a heads up!

[Alex Whittingham]

other? help me here

[Whopity]

I heard some comments a couple of weeks ago. The process seems to have settled down with use however; an observation was that the pass marks were lower than in the past, possibly due to a different range of questions and material.

[MrAverage]

Alex

I'm surprised a guru like yourself didn't know of the forum glued to a certain magazine.

[jeepys]

I have had a bit of experience of these. Probably seen about 7 now.
My personal view is that they are generally too difficult. There are many questions written more like the CPL exams and designed to catch you out.
There are numerous ambiguous questions which are not particularly well written. I have also seen a few questions with I think wrong answers according to the feedback afterwards.
Passmark has not changed but the option to question a question has.

[shorehamite]

other? help me here

me too please

[Edward Hawkins]

It's a forum that has flyers

[Happy Wanderer]

As a GR(A) (now Invigilator) for the new e-exams, I'd agree that the process has settled down a bit now, but we had teething problems in the beginning that meant we were actually late starting. Once you can get your head around what's involved and required and you're reasonably PC/tablet-literate, it not too bad. The move towards an e-based system is certainly welcome and I for one am glad we've finally done away with paper, commensurate with advances elsewhere in the industry. There are a myriad of guidance notes supplied by e-exams for the various roles involved in the systems (admin, schedulers, invigilator etc) which really need to be read and understood for things to work smoothly. I'd also agree that the questions are a lot harder compared to what we've seen before, and unsurprisingly this had reflected in some failed exams. I've got mixed views on this tbh - we have had instances where question content can't immediately be traced back to learning objectives and text books and do sometimes place a question mark on the marked relevance to PPL flying; on the other hand, the unpredictability of questions does (pleasingly) mean that candidates now have to learn the subject matter rather than the questions which surely makes them better all-round pilots and also better-prepared for the ATPL theories that follow. Under the previous paper-based system, the likes of 'PPL Tutor' and other study aids removed the complexities involved and enabled candidates to take and pass exams without any real effort required, aside from memorising the questions. I'd say that is very much not the case now.

[Kemble Pitts]

...and also better-prepared for the ATPL theories that follow.

Is this really one of the 'thinkings' behind the PPL exams?

If somebody wants a PPL, then they want a, er, PPL. If they want to go on to 'the ATPL theories that follow' then they will, and will need to put in the necessary effort. Who on earth thought that the PPL exams should be preparation for an ATPL?? For Christ's sake, don't try to make the PPL some sort of 'entrance exam' for the ATPL course.

Hopefully I've got the wrong end of the stick...

[jeepys]

Kemble P,

my sentiments exactly.
There is, like many things, a balance to be struck. If you make it too hard then less people will go through training. If you make it too easy then the approach to flying becomes like jumping on your bike. I don’t know what the answer is but at the moment some of the e-exams need attention.

[Whopity]

As early as 1993 Ron Campbell was pushing the idea that the PPL was the first module in a Modular ATPL. Without that there was no justification for a European PPL.

[Bushdodge]

I don’t know what the answer is but at the moment some of the e-exams need attention.

We in the industry seeing the questions need to hold the CAA to account and email them about their short comings. This has already resulted in some e-Exam questions being changed.

I think they are generally an improvement. My overall impression is that the questions are more relevant to real world flying than the paper exams. That said, I've seen some shockers. One FPP candidate got a multi-engine question! I've also seen some where I think they had the wrong answer marked as correct but it's very difficult to check this given the limited feedback linking to a part of the 'syllabus' (but don't get me started on how the 'syllabus' is nothing like a syllabus but infact a very ambiguous list of topics)

[Happy Wanderer]

Hopefully I've got the wrong end of the stick...

With respect, you have. Our ATO students are all modular, and the vast majority will go on to do either full-time or DL-based ATPL theory exams as soon as they've obtained their PPLs. The PPL e-exams ARE good preparation for those going down the commercial route - not only is the subject matter obviously relevant, the e-exam format is exactly what they'll see with the ATPLs. The complexity of the new e-exam questions is certainly an issue in places and is reflected in some failed papers; but surely this is better than three potentially tatty paper exams for each of the nine subjects, with the bulk of the question formats (if not the actual questions themselves) in the public domain. I can't comment on students who stay with a PPL as very few of ours will.

[Alex Whittingham]

Thank you, have found the flyer thread. Not massively informative about the content of the exams. Having had some experience of (EASA) examiners' loose interpretation of learning objectives I was particularly interested to find out if they had managed to stay within the bounds of the LOs?

[Duchess_Driver]

With respect, you have. Our ATO students are all modular, and the vast majority will go on to do either full-time or DL-based ATPL theory exams as soon as they've obtained their PPLs.

I think I might have the wrong end of the stick as well as I am with Kemble Pits on this one.

Whilst the PPL exams may be seen by some as an entrance exam for the ATPL TK that is not their purpose. It goes without saying (or should) the PPL exam should check the level of understanding appropriate for the Private Pilot. The ATPL TK should then build upon that foundation.

That’s not to say the exam at PPL should be a walk in the park and let’s hope that any problems with the question bank get ironed out quickly. Let’s face it, the old system was long overdue an overhaul.

[Fl1ingfrog]

I'm baffled but not surprised to read so many convolutions for the purpose of an exam. Any course for a private pilots licence is for one purpose: to operate safely meaning with the risk of harm to oneself and to others kept at the minimum. So the course contains a mixture of necessary handling skills and necessary knowledge. This is then followed by both a practical and a knowledge assessment to ensure this is achieved. The PPL is not a 'unit' offering 'credits' for anything else. The licence stands on its own merit. The content should not include anything not relevant nor be done in such a way that is not part of the immediate aim.

[Alex Whittingham]

I can see how some view the PPL theory as being the first module of professional groundschool, the EASA/UK regs encourage this idea. An integrated groundschool, for instance, has an ab-initio assumption and must have a min duration of 750 hours whereas a modular groundschool requires a PPL to start and has a min duration of 650 hours, this lower figure is based on the assumption that the candidate has already completed 100 hours of PPL theory instruction. In theory a modular course design can assume the candidate already has PPL theory knowledge, but no one does. Evidently the first statement is also true, the purpose of the PPL theory is to prepare the candidate to exercise the prvileges of the PPL. IMHO the flaw lies in equating required course hours with competencies achieved - but this flaw runs like a thread of poo through all the EASA training requirements and will not be overturned until they figure out a way of actually testing required knowledge and competencies effectively.

[B61]

Hmmm....well I could almost have wrote the script guessing as to what the feedback would be. I had to ask, I suppose.......

And of course, it’s got to be an over complicated screw-up where the exams are taken as a a lead-in to ATPLs. Lots of irrelevant guff, incorrect answers, tenuous links to LOs, let’s keep the questions a secret, Etc etc.

OK, that’s they way it is. So, who is going to set up the question bank site for PPLs, like we have for the ATPLs, so people can jump through the hoops?

Someone will do it soon. If it’s already there, can someone put the link on please.

[fibod]

Alex are you ever going to introduce a PPL course? Some of the material currently being sold is very dated!

[Alex Whittingham]

Funny you should say that. We are just completing a PPL course based on Jeremy Pratt's books - but updated. PPL QB will also follow. As the PPL theory is less 'mandatory' than the ATPL it remains to be seen what the take-up will be. There's an idea, a mandatory 100 hours of provable PPL theory training like the EU have....unnnhh I just argued against that!

[fibod]

Well, things are pretty quiet right now, but when they do pick up, if your books are priced right and as good quality as your ATPL ones, as long as people know about them I'm sure you'll do well. Good luck!

[Mickey Kaye]

I think 9 seperate exams is a bit over the top. How about one exam of 120 questions? or maybe two?

[Whopity]

Sadly the whole thing is a very unprofessional mess. There has never ever been a training analysis since aviation first began. We have had a number of well meaning individuals who have saught to implement changes but they are seldom completed in a timely manner. A revised PPL Syllabus appeared as an ALTMOC in 2015; the revised Learning Objectives appeard in 2019, but how many know what they are or where to find them, a quick look on the CAA website produces this:

Sorry, your search for PPL LOs did not return any results.

You can find them under e-exams (https://www.caa.co.uk/General-aviation/Pilot-licences/Training-organisations/PPL-e-exams/)but then they are spread across 10 CAPS from CAP2090A to CAP2090J; well of course there are 9 exams! It appears not all the questions relate to the LOs!
The CAA once employed Ground Examiners who wrote examinations, but in anticipation of JAR-FCL they were made redundant. They discovered they still needed a few at the professional level to iron out the poor quality of the European papers but they never funded any more PPL Examiners and haven't officially had any for over 20 years now. One or two members of staff did it on a voluntary basis.
In contrast, the BMAA produced their own papers and had the CAA print them, a bit of a clue here I would have thought.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I think 9 separate exams is a bit over the top. How about one exam of 120 questions? or maybe two?

Good lord ! The majority of the PPL's in the world fly in North America. Both the FAA and Transport Canada have only one exam with sections for the main knowledge areas. Since North American PPL's have an equal or better safety record when compared to UK PPL's, I find it hard to believe that the over the top written exam requirements prepare UK PPL's ability to be safe pilots any better than the NA system. Seems to me this is a regulator bent on making the prefect self licking ice cream cone. Sadly the only victims will be individuals who just want to be recreational pilots.....

[BEagle]

1. There is one theoretical knowledge exam which consists of 120 questions divided into 9 'papers'; 3 of which have 16 questions, the other 6 have 12. That was to make the 75% pass mark simple. Applicants can sit as many papers at a time as they wish.
2. Current 'all exams first time pass rate' is over 80%.
3. Many of the questions written by 'industry' (yours, perhaps Mike?) were rejected. ALL others were peer-reviewed by a group of PPL pilots, instructors and examiners - including CAA reps. No 'ex-RAF navigators' of legend were involved! We had to re-write many of them (and no, we weren't paid a penny for our assistance) before they were suitable.
4. Most failures have been from those who didn't RTFQ.
5. I don't like the limited debrief system, but it does seem to work.

At the end of the day, people have to learn the subject, not the answers. Something which some find rather taxing, it would seem....

[Fl1ingfrog]

At the end of the day, people have to learn the subject, not the answers. Something which some find rather taxing, it would seem....

I couldn't agree more. However there have been many pointless and unhelpful questions over the years that are simply irritating and unhelpful. e.g. "a part of an aeroplane detached in flight, fell to the ground and struck a member of the public". Is this an aircraft accident or an aircraft incident? I cannot remember a single candidate answering this question correctly and why should they. The correct answer should be: on landing I will contact someone and find out what form I fill in and have the aircraft inspected before the next flight.

My point is relevance. I would like to know what the suggested questions offered by the industry were (who are the industry anyway?) and why their offerings were rejected. What I can say is that 9 volumes of required study by a private pilot is nonsense and this should be obvious to everyone. The PPL exams should only be the need to know. I don't know why it takes so many people to create 120 questions plus alternates.

The online question and answer packages will soon be available. The pilot will simply tick the boxes and leave the room knowing little and for a short period of time. Sad but true. The training industry from my own observations has lost all confidence in the invigilating regime and also, it seems, so have the CAA invigilators (in kind).

[Whopity]

There is one theoretical knowledge exam which consists of 120 questions divided into 9 'papers'; 3 of which have 16 questions, the other 6 have 12. That was to make the 75% pass mark simple. I would have hoped that the average student and Examiner was capable of calculating 75% of 120 witthout such a convoluted procedure!

[BEagle]

I would too.

With the earlier exams, it wasn't always unambiguously clear whether a candidate had achieved the pass mark.

[Fl1ingfrog]

I can't remember ever finding the exam pass mark to be ambiguous. Nor do I understand why it takes a cacophony of people to set an exam. It should simply be: what is the PPL holder required to know and then simply ask the questions to check that they do.

A bunch of old farts (I am one) who are clearly struggling to put these exams together (I'm not one) need to get switched on and get up to date. I must say though, living in France, all this nonsense is far worse and riddled with widespread personal and out of date opinions.

[B61]

Since the U.K. has left EASA, why do the exams have to follow their 120 questions / 9 subjects diktat?

Seems that with most of the professional UK schools now decanting out to supervision of a friendly EASA country such as Denmark or Austria, the only aviation the CAA will have oversight of is PPL training.

They could show some independence by ditching this tangle of exams and go for something more sensible and ICAO compliant. Just one exam, as with the FAA, or maybe two as suggested above.

And stop hiding the questions from even the “Examiner”. We will look a total prat when we can’t even tell them where they went wrong and why!