Average Score on Knowledge Test

Randall45 said:
Although pithy, I think there is a flaw in this line of thinking. The situation isn't binary--you can study for the test and be an inquisitive pilot. The consensus here is basically that the written isn't 100% reflective on the ability/capacity to be a pilot.

Just as you say it's no good to just study the answers to the test, it is also no good to ask your CFI questions but get a 50 on the exam
Click to expand...

Studying for the test is different that studying the test.



If you have a big red book in your library I'd say you are not an 'inquisitive pilot'.
 
Captain said:
Studying for the test is different that studying the test.



If you have a big red book in your library I'd say you are not an 'inquisitive pilot'.
Click to expand...


I read the books and studied the tests. I got a 100 on PPL and 95 on the instrument written. I guarantee that studying the tests helped my score tremendously, but I know that I read the books and asked questions along the way. Part of the problem IMO is that you don't know what to ask. After looking at the test questions, I asked my CFII to help me answer a few of them. Having old test questions can be good if you don't use them as a crutch.
 
I got an 87 on my private and I think 84 on my instrument, and I am historically pretty good at tests. I then went on to learn what I didn't know and forgot what I didn't need to have learned.
 
Ron Levy said:
I resemble that remark. Well, not quite -- it was a 2.26 to be exact.

But the real problem is the FAA written tests don't adequately test your knowledge of the relevant conceptual material (and they do test a lot of nonconceptual material that isn't relevant), and even if they did, what's really important is your ability to apply the information.
Click to expand...


I'm glad I got a 96% on my IR written, but often wonder how I would have done if they hadn't asked me questions about microwave approaches or other irrelevant technology I never studied for.
 
JasonM said:
I'm glad I got a 96% on my IR written, but often wonder how I would have done if they hadn't asked me questions about microwave approaches or other irrelevant technology I never studied for.
Click to expand...

I wish I was asked about MLS on my instrument written... I was working on them at the time! Didn't need to study about those.
 
I also got a 90 on mine, have yet to take the oral/practical but hopefully soon.

IMO, the written is mostly fine but I don't think they should have questions in there that you could/would just look up on the ground. Eg... how many days to notify the FAA if you move, how many days to notify after an accident/incident/etc. Seriously I've already forgotten that... actually I missed one of those questions so maybe I never really knew it. The point is I have all the time and resources in the world to look that up if/when I need to. There are other examples but that's all I can think of on the spot.

If it isn't something I'd need to know from memory to operate the airplane safely... or might need to know in an emergency to get safely on the ground I question why it's on there. With so much material that could potentially save your life to cover, I wish we didn't have to waste so much mental horsepower on bureaucratic details.

Speaking of which, while I did get(and miss) a couple of those types of questions, the randomly selected test did not give me one single question that required me to pick up my e6b..... after all the time spent learning that thing not one single question. :dunno:
 
Last edited:
You're right about studying the test versus studying for the test. But in my region at least, flight instructing is a freelance industry. There is no giant complex that provides ground school, flight instruction, support, etc. You get assigned a guy and he'll teach you how to fly, and refer you to a book to pass the test.

I think what you're saying is still correct, but memorizing the test isn't the worst thing in the world. It means you know VFR minimums for different types of airspace, how to use an E6B, etc.

Now I actually read the pilot private handbook by Gleim and the test prep book--and the test prep book has a disclaimer after every lesson overview saying that this is the bare minimum. So the book is not evil.

But here's the real question: If a pilot passes his practical, does it really matter if he studied for the test or the test itself?
 
Personally, I don't think it matters. If it did, the FAA would require a higher minimum score than 70%, wouldn't they?

I also think it depends on when you take the test. Some people take it pretty early in their training. If you take it the day before the checkride, I think it would raise concerns that you weren't really prepared if you only get a 70 or so.
 
rbridges said:
I read the books and studied the tests. I got a 100 on PPL and 95 on the instrument written. I guarantee that studying the tests helped my score tremendously, but I know that I read the books and asked questions along the way. Part of the problem IMO is that you don't know what to ask. After looking at the test questions, I asked my CFII to help me answer a few of them. Having old test questions can be good if you don't use them as a crutch.
Click to expand...

You are in no position to make that claim having never met me or any clue what questions I asked or didn't ask.

I base my opinion of studying the test based partly on my experience of 10K hours, ATP, two types including 727, CFI, CFII, and MEI.

Study the answers if you must, but I reserve the right to look down my nose at those that do.
 
Captain said:
You are in no position to make that claim having never met me or any clue what questions I asked or didn't ask.

I base my opinion of studying the test based partly on my experience of 10K hours, ATP, two types including 727, CFI, CFII, and MEI.

Study the answers if you must, but I reserve the right to look down my nose at those that do.
Click to expand...

I know things are getting contentious, but I still see a small error in what your'e saying.

Studying the answers and being a good student pilot are not mutually exclusive. Perhaps you should look down your nose at students who memorize the answers and figure that the entire scope of their learning.

In fact, most procedural matters for flying require rote memorization. I know that this will cause an uprising because rote memorization is considered taboo in learning, but knowing facts is necessary to properly construct the bigger picture. You have to learn the facts.

What is the difference between memorizing 3SM VFR minimums in E versus asking your instructor for that same answer? Learning to fly is not the most mentally exhaustive subject in the world, why make this more complex than it needs to be?

I can see your argument being valid in something as complex as world history. If you asked me to tell you about the Mongol Dynasty in Chinese history and all I could say was that it was called the Yuan Dynasty, you'd be troubled. You'd want me to mention how the Mongols almost killed all the Chinese to make pasture land, or how they resisted cultural integration and forced the Chinese men to cut their hair a certain way. This 'backstory' does not exist in flying. They are simple rules and facts--complex analysis is not what it is testing, nor should it be.
 
Last edited:
Because one way I learn that I need to have 3SM miles of vis in class D airspace and the other I learn 'C'. What's really frustrating is the second way typically results in a higher score for the student.
 
Captain said:
Because one way I learn that I need to have 3SM miles of vis in class D airspace and the other I learn 'C'. What's really frustrating is the second way typically results in a higher score for the student.
Click to expand...

...what? Students actually just memorize the answer choice?! Perhaps my arguments are in vain. That's ridiculous. I thought you were admonishing those who memorized the answers--not their corresponding letter on the test.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top