Morgans wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote

All of these points are pertinent. There are as well HUGE issues
concerning the manner in which many flight schools and instructors
integrate with new students. Much could be done to improve the general
business model.

At many flight schools, it seems as though flight instruction is an
accidental by-product.

The real goal seems to be to give time builders (instructors, though I
hesitate to use that term for some) a chance to log hours, and to move on to
bigger and better careers. The instructor's schedule flexibility is more
important than keeping the student's scheduled lesson appointment.

Yes, I know there are exceptions, and this has been lamented over before,
but it is still relevant.

I feel that the time commitment is the next biggest impediment, and the big
roadblock to more students and pilots getting and staying current is still
the price. I don't know what could be done to greatly improve the
situation, and I don't see it changing very much. I do feel that Light
Sport is a step in the right direction, but it is still expensive, and
moving very slowly in the right direction.

Your points are all valid. The entire structure dealing with the way
CFI's and flight school management interface has been built over time on
a foundation weakened by the way BOTH the instructors and the system
integrate with each other.
You are correct that it is indeed a poor business model. I don't have
the answer to all this, but one thing I do know. NOTHING will change
until the role of the instructor is seen as a professional role, and
this requires BOTH the system AND the instructor corps to re-evaluate
and restructure themselves. I don't see this happening.

This being said, the only thing that can improve the situation is for
individual CFI's to improve their own image. Some are doing this. Many
are not.
The state of the art is not optimized by a long shot.

--
Dudley Henriques