"Platoon" instructing versus dedicated...

I've done it both ways and prefer the "instructor "du jour" system. I
got my Airplane Single Engine Land rating with a single instructor from
start to finish. Then, added the glider rating "the other way".

Different instructors stress different points so, in the long run,
you'll get a broader education. There are two potential downsides.
The first is that unless all of the instructors communicate well, it may
take longer to complete the training due to excess repetition.
The second is that the student will get conflicting information that may
be different to sort out.

Some prefer one method, some the other.

Tony, LsS6-b "6N"

Originally Posted by Tony V

I've done it both ways and prefer the "instructor "du jour" system. Some prefer one method, some the other.

Tony, LsS6-b "6N"

Hence the correct answer as in most tactical aviation questions is: It depends. Both obviously work, both obviously have flaws.

Ab initio students seem to do better with a dedicated instructor (who is available when they are...) who can provide encouragement and instruction while following their progress. They are familiar with what the student is doing right, wrong, where they are weak or strong, and they can base their instruction and next ride on that knowledge.

Students with some avaiation experience, or who are more driven like Flubber, would do well in platoon systems, getting varied view points and experience and being able to fly each time they make it out to the club.

I'm lucky in my club, and they do it both ways--mostly we try to pair a new student with one instructor, who does conduct ground training sessions, until they are ready to solo. At that point most of our instructors have their student fly with another instructor for the differences and for a separate evaluation before they solo.

For me, I wanted to fly everytime I showed up--even if my instructor couldn't be there. I took responsibility for my own ground school and studies (attending sessions of other instructor when they let me). But having a military background, I like flying with multiple instructors.

Either way, continuity of flying and training is a major issue--paired instructors are good, but if mutual instructor or student schedules make flying an every other weekend or worse situation it's not ideal. The platoon system helps solve the flying continuity issue, but not the instruction and personal following continuity. Being a weekend only type of sport makes it a tougher nut to crack.

Interesting thread..
The system we use at my club is almost the ideal system described by
Stefan. We split the students into groups of 3-5 per instructor and
they always fly the same day, usually every Saturday or Sunday morning
and sometimes there is a weekday group. They start together and stick
with the same instructor for the entire course, normally making two
flights per day. When they are about to solo or having difficulties we
often have them fly with another instructor to make sure we didn´t
miss something or for the student to get a different perspective.
Along with the normal ground instruction by the instructor, we have 5
or 6 Saturday evening classes for all of the students with
presentations by specialists on Aerodynamics, Flight Maneuvers, Ground
Operations, Meteorology, Safety, Airspace, Regulations, etc.
One of the instructors is a psychologist and he interviews all of the
applicants before they begin. This works very well for profiling the
students and finding the best match with the instructors and also as a
way to filter out the undesireable ones.
Intstructors don´t get paid but we get a free tow for every eight
instruction flights..

We are near a very large city so there is no shortage of applicants
and we don´t have enough instructors to take all of them. Usually we
turn out around 15-20 pilots per year but only a fraction of them are
still flying a year or two later. Getting them to stay is what we see
as the biggest problem. My opinion is that for many people the sport
just takes too much commitment.
It would be great if it was cheaper and simpler but then I guess it
wouldn´t be soaring..

Regards,

Juan Carlos

On Wed, 30 May 2012 08:40:02 -0500, JC
wrote:

Juan Carlos, thanks for the input. It's actually very interesting to
read. I know some people that think that if we offered more "structured"
training (such as you appear to offer), that we'd have better outcomes in
terms of retention, etc.

From your experience, it seems like this is not the case. In other words,
even with a very well refined program like you have, and even with turning
away some students (the horror!), and even with psychological evaluations
of new students (jeez, we've got a few licensed members that I sometimes
think need a psyc evaluation ) you still lose a lot of members after
licensing.

Very good datapoint indeed. It sort-of confirms my thinking, too,
although it's a bit depressing to think that the sport is just too much
commitment for most people. It makes it tough to address the retention
problem since as you say fundamentally the sport is demanding, not much
you can do to change it.

--Stefan

Interesting thread..
The system we use at my club is almost the ideal system described by
Stefan. We split the students into groups of 3-5 per instructor and
they always fly the same day, usually every Saturday or Sunday morning
and sometimes there is a weekday group. They start together and stick
with the same instructor for the entire course, normally making two
flights per day. When they are about to solo or having difficulties we
often have them fly with another instructor to make sure we didn´t
miss something or for the student to get a different perspective.
Along with the normal ground instruction by the instructor, we have 5
or 6 Saturday evening classes for all of the students with
presentations by specialists on Aerodynamics, Flight Maneuvers, Ground
Operations, Meteorology, Safety, Airspace, Regulations, etc.
One of the instructors is a psychologist and he interviews all of the
applicants before they begin. This works very well for profiling the
students and finding the best match with the instructors and also as a
way to filter out the undesireable ones.
Intstructors don´t get paid but we get a free tow for every eight
instruction flights..

We are near a very large city so there is no shortage of applicants
and we don´t have enough instructors to take all of them. Usually we
turn out around 15-20 pilots per year but only a fraction of them are
still flying a year or two later. Getting them to stay is what we see
as the biggest problem. My opinion is that for many people the sport
just takes too much commitment.
It would be great if it was cheaper and simpler but then I guess it
wouldn´t be soaring..

Regards,

Juan Carlos


--
Stefan Murry

On May 30, 10:13*am, "S. Murry" wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2012 08:40:02 -0500, JC

wrote:

Juan Carlos, thanks for the input. *It's actually very interesting to
read. *I know some people that think that if we offered more "structured"
training (such as you appear to offer), that we'd have better outcomes in
terms of retention, etc.

*From your experience, it seems like this is not the case. *In other words,
even with a very well refined program like you have, and even with turning
away some students (the horror!), and even with psychological evaluations
of new students (jeez, we've got a few licensed members that I sometimes
think need a psyc evaluation ) you still lose a lot of members after
licensing.

Very good datapoint indeed. *It sort-of confirms my thinking, too,
although it's a bit depressing to think that the sport is just too much
commitment for most people. *It makes it tough to address the retention
problem since as you say fundamentally the sport is demanding, not much
you can do to change it.

--Stefan









Interesting thread..
The system we use at my club is almost the ideal system described by
Stefan. We split the students into groups of 3-5 per instructor and
they always fly the same day, usually every Saturday or Sunday morning
and sometimes there is a weekday group. They start together and stick
with the same instructor for the entire course, normally making two
flights per day. When they are about to solo or having difficulties we
often have them fly with another instructor to make sure we didn´t
miss something or for the student to get a different perspective.
Along with the normal ground instruction by the instructor, we have 5
or 6 Saturday evening classes for all of the students with
presentations by specialists on Aerodynamics, Flight Maneuvers, Ground
Operations, Meteorology, Safety, Airspace, Regulations, etc.
One of the instructors is a psychologist and he interviews all of the
applicants before they begin. This works very well for profiling the
students and finding the best match with the instructors and also as a
way to filter out the undesireable ones.
Intstructors don´t get paid but we get a free tow for every eight
instruction flights..

We are near a very large city so there is no shortage of applicants
and we don´t have enough instructors to take all of them. Usually we
turn out around 15-20 pilots per year but only a fraction of them are
still flying a year or two later. Getting them to stay is what we see
as the biggest problem. My opinion is that for many people the sport
just takes too much commitment.
It would be great if it was cheaper and simpler but then I guess it
wouldn´t be soaring..

Regards,

Juan Carlos

--
Stefan Murry

It should not be overlooked that students have a large degree of
control over their own training if they are proactive about it.
Students can almost write their own lesson plans. If they do this,
any instructor scheduling system will work for them.

The first question in instructors minds at the beginning of a session
is, "What does this guy need to work on?" If students speak up and
tell the instructor what concerns them, things go quicker. Students
can do this by reading the PTS and bringing areas which concern them
to the instructors attention. If students read the Glider Flying
Handbook and write questions in the margins for areas they don't feel
they understand completely helps too. I have never known an
instructor who won't take the time to explain or demonstrate.

Unfortunately, some students won't do any of this hoping somehow,
someday, they'll get a license. This puts a heavy workload on the
instructor and makes for a long, slow route to a license.

In an ideal world the student would be switched on and proactive in their training but glider clubs can be difficult to 'crack' as in feeling a real part of the scene and a feeling of belonging. In my experience that makes a real difference in the level of keenness from the student and along with social activities at the club can help bind them to the sport

At my club the instructors are rostered on and the students mostly fly with who ever is on duty. They are free to fly with any instructor by arrangement and some choose to do this. Here in New Zealand we have a structured syllabus that leads through to being a qualified glider pilot which goes some way to keeping good continuity between the different instructors.

http://www.gliding.co.nz/training/syllabus


One of the bigger problems I have seen in the last 8 years since my return to the sport is 'old worn out' instructors staying in the game for the free flying with students and trial flights. They only flew when someone else was paying and showed little interest in progressing the students through the syllabus. Fortunately for all concerned this has largely disappeared in the last couple of years. I would also like to be very clear that some of our 'old timers' are/were excellent instructors and with their years of experience are of great value to the club

Colin

http://www.glidingauckland.co.nz

On Wed, 30 May 2012 06:40:02 -0700, JC wrote:

Interesting thread..

Getting [newly qualified pilots] to stay is what we see as the
biggest problem. My opinion is that for many people the sport just takes
too much commitment.

A view from across the pond. I've heard it said that the smaller, weekend-
only UK clubs have a similar problem, but that's just hearsay because I
haven't experienced that.

I was lucky: I joined my club because I wanted to learn in glass and it
was the only nearby club with an ASK-21 and a G.103. My first gliding
experience was in an ASK-13 - I think they're OK, but they didn't grab me
and still don't. I was lucky because, when I knew enough to understand
gliding I realized that, unlike a number of the smaller clubs, my club
has a very strong XC orientation and the culture is very much that once
you're solo, OF COURSE you'll get your bronze badge, followed by the XC
qualification and then go for Silver, get into XC and start working on
your Gold and maybe try racing and/or become an instructor. IOW, there is
a defined way ahead: we don't leave a newly soloed pilot to bimble around
the airfield in two seaters or the SZD Juniors until they get bored and
leave. Of course, it also helps that the club has three good Standard
gliders (currently a Pegase, Discus, and ASW-24) which are expected to go
XC.

When I'd nearly got my Bronze and so was close to XC standard, it was
time of year for the local Regionals to be run on our field. The custom
was for the club's G.103 to be entered with an experienced XC pilot as P1
and a group of us, all at the same stage, got to crew for it. Each of us
got a day as P2. If your club runs a Regionals or equivalent on its field
consider doing the same: I can't think of a better way to show a new
pilot the joys of XC flying.

Oh yeah, we also use the 'platoon' instruction method but probably
without some of the faffing, since all instructors will have done BGA
courses and all will be teaching the syllabus in the BGA Instructors
Manual. So, if I hadn't flown with a particular instructor for a while, a
glance at my log book and a short chat told him where I was at and what I
needed to do next.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

On May 30, 6:16*pm, Martin Gregorie
wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2012 06:40:02 -0700, JC wrote:
Interesting thread..

Getting [newly qualified pilots] to stay is what we see as the
biggest problem. My opinion is that for many people the sport just takes
too much commitment.

A view from across the pond. I've heard it said that the smaller, weekend-
only UK clubs have a similar problem, but that's just hearsay because I
haven't experienced that.

I am new to gliding, but I am getting on in years, so I learn more
slowly than the young folks. I also don't get out more than once a
week, so it is taking me a while to make progress. Our club has a
"duty instructor" on weekends who is assigned from a list, like the
tow pilot, and the usual duty is one or two half days a month..

It works well for me. I can fly whenever I am available, and I get
different points of view. The club issues a training logbook with lots
of tasks and levels so both I and the instructor can see what needs to
be done. The club is, sadly, not overwhelmed with students so I can
get as much training as I want.

The alternative of a fixed instructor and a set schedule, would
perhaps get my skills up faster, but I would probably come out less
since I would have to coordinate with someone else. As it is, the club
is a place to "hang out" whenever I can and there is always something
to do.

Many years ago I belonged to a sailing club with a very active
training program. Training sessions involved crowds of students and
instructors on the dock paired up randomly in a first come, first
served format. The lessons were disorganized but the social life was
great. They later went to a more organized plan with scheduled times
and instructors, so there were far few people hanging about,... and
the club collapsed.


John Halpenny

On Thu, 31 May 2012 16:45:28 -0700, John Halpenny wrote:

Many years ago I belonged to a sailing club with a very active training
program. Training sessions involved crowds of students and instructors
on the dock paired up randomly in a first come, first served format. The
lessons were disorganized but the social life was great. They later went
to a more organized plan with scheduled times and instructors, so there
were far few people hanging about,... and the club collapsed.

We're not collapsing, but I see something similar since my club switched
to bookable training rather than the traditional flying list at the
launch point.

I learned with the list: worked for me, as I got solo in six months of
weekend-only flying. I learnt on the winch in a system that guaranteed at
least two launches each time you got to the top of the queue, and three
if demand was lower. There was generally a reasonable number of people
around the launch point, so ground handling muscle was usually not a
problem and at busy times we had enough helpers to manage almost 20
launches an hour using a dual-drum winch.

Now that almost all training is booked there simply aren't very many
people at the launch point: last Saturday PM I was the only designated
launch point marshal (there are normally two) and so was very busy and
forced to rely on students and those waiting to fly to keep things moving
because nobody else was there to help by retrieving landed gliders,
fetching winch cables, etc, etc. I accept that booked training is
probably better for students, but it wrecks the launch point social scene
and makes life much harder for those running the flight line.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

Let me try to put a different spin on this topic:

For those of you doing the "platoon" system, two big questions:

1) How do you get around the fact that when a student flies with an
instructor they haven't seen in a couple of months the instructor
invariably asks the student to repeat what they already know, to "get
a feel" for the student? This tends to burn several hours of the
student's time as they wait around for the launch line and the
instructor to come available. This creates a great deal of
frustration in our club among students who often only get 2 flights a
day (one of which is purely review)...

2) Relying on students to be "self-motivated" or "design their own
lesson plans" only works if the students know what the hell they're
supposed to be doing next, or concentrating on. As mentioned by
others in this thread, that works OK with transition students or add-
on rations; but ab-initio students are frequently drifting without a
compass. How does your club deal with that? In our club, we seem to
be good at telling new members to go to the launch line on their first
day and chat up an instructor. But after that it seems all they learn
to do is buy a few books, carry them around, and take repeated flights
with instructors (who's pre-flight briefings take all of 5 minutes and
post-flight briefings consist of a chat while walking the glider back
to the line). Do those of you with a platoon system find that you
have decent ground instruction? Do your platoon instructors actually
sit down with students and give them guidance? Do they make
themselves available at any other time besides on the launch-line?
What support-systems do you have in place? My experience is that
"platoon" instructors aren't tied to any students, so its easy for
them to not take any responsibility for their students' success or
failure. How do you avoid that?

[NOTE: For those who want to insist that its the student's job to take
responsibility and that truly motivated students will succeed - I
understand the sentiment but I also point to the high student dropout
rate and declining pilot population as evidence that this is a ****-
poor argument. Yes, we can see that motivated people are getting
their license; but it doesn't mean that the system is functioning
well. Most sports or skill-based activities have mentors and coaches
for a good reason - even if someone is motivated they can still use
guidance and encouragement. This can be seen in grassroots/amateur
hobbies all the way up through the highest levels of professional
athletes.]

3) For those who moved to scheduled training: Do you do anything
social in your club to support the social-scene other than having a
launch-line? Do you think events like BBQs or Seminars or Mentoring
sessions would help?

4) For those who talk about scheduled training causing them to come
out less-often: What about supplementing your in-air experiences with
flight simulators or ground-instruction (in-person, on the phone,
online, etc)?

--Noel