Instrument Rating Ground Course Recommendations? CFI Lament with Inst Pilot Rating Student

F

fly4usa

Pre-Flight
Joined
Aug 5, 2018
Messages
73
Display Name
Display name:
fly4usa
What are the recommendations for a ground school, Instrument Pilot Rating?
King
Pilot Institute
ASA2fly
Sporty's
Jeppesen
Other?

I have an Inst student that might benefit from one of these Inst courses.

I never bought any internet or video course in my career for my ratings. Three was no internet on-line or YouTube in 1985. If you got KING it was VHS. Never bought that. I got the references, AIM/FAR, FAA Handbooks, FAA AC's, PTS (now ACS), and ASA prep sample written questions. As well as IAP (and Legend), Low Alt Chart (and Legend), Chart Supplements; I self studied through my career up to ATP with help of my CFI's. Thank you CFI's... Got +90's and 100's on exams, passed check ride in min time first time. I paid for a training center to get my Citation Jet and ATP rating. My airline training was per airline school house. I still think all the references and reading, studying works.

All my GA students at least in the early days of my career (and early days of internet nothing on-line), were self study, with me giving the students the references and some one on one ground instruction as needed. Pre written and pre check I evaluated and prep'ed them. Worked well, very successful. I had great students.
 
Last edited:
I did Gold Seal and had no problem understanding the material and scoring well on the test (missed one question). I did also complete the Sheppard course a couple of weeks prior to the test.

Gold Seal Online Ground School

Gold Seal is the best choice for online ground school training. Its revolutionary approach to teaching makes it the top choice for Private Pilot, Instrument Pilot, and Remote Pilot.
groundschool.com groundschool.com
 
Sheppard Air was the one i used. It was only for written test purposes. It’s designed for that only.
 
I used gold seal twice and passed it twice.

I know my channel is sponsored by them and all that but it's because I believe in the product. Go sign up and take the first lesson for free that'll tell you everything you need to know.
 
I think that FlightInsight is the best, but watch some of their youtube videos and decide for yourself.
 
As a boomer (self-taught, self-motivated) who owned training centers for complex software, I learned that different people learn in different ways. When I learned to fly, I read the manual, but found the on-line video courses to be the optimal means for me to learn the material. I then reviewed with my CFI to fully comprehend the topics. Then we flew to put those concepts into practice. That worked well for me.

I won’t criticize you as you’re clearly a successful and seasoned CFI, but your post seems to indicate a disdain for other ways to learn. This one student isn’t your failure, and it may not be theirs either. Augmenting your personal reaching style with videos might prove to be better for all your students.

I enjoyed the Jeppesen course.
 
fly4usa said:
What are the recommendations for a ground school, Instrument Pilot Rating?
King
Pilot Institute
ASA2fly
Sporty's
Jeppesen
Other?

I have an Inst student that might benefit from one of these Inst courses.

I never bought any internet or video course in my career for my ratings. Three was no internet on-line or YouTube in 1985. If you got KING it was VHS. Never bought that. I got the references, AIM/FAR, FAA Handbooks, FAA AC's, PTS (now ACS), and ASA prep sample written questions. As well as IAP (and Legend), Low Alt Chart (and Legend), Chart Supplements; I self studied through my career up to ATP with help of my CFI's. Thank you CFI's... Got +90's and 100's on exams, passed check ride in min time first time. I paid for a training center to get my Citation Jet and ATP rating. My airline training was per airline school house. I still think all the references and reading, studying works.

All my GA students at least in the early days of my career (and early days of internet nothing on-line), were self study, with me giving the students the references and some one on one ground instruction as needed. Pre written and pre check I evaluated and prep'ed them. Worked well, very successful. I had great students.
Click to expand...
None of those you list is a ground school. They are self study courses.
 
Clip4 said:
None of those you list is a ground school. They are self study courses.
Click to expand...
Can’t speak for all of them, but King is definitely a ground school that will take them through all required topics (plus some) and does a decent job of prepping a student for instrument flying and the test. I would still recommend using Shepard Air afterwards to maximize your test score.
 
I started with Sheppard Air but really got tired of the repetition required to burn the answers in my head. I switched to King and liked it. With King I felt like I was learning and with Sheppard all I was doing was memorizing. If I wanted to learn something with Sheppard, to understand why a particular answer was correct, I had to research that on my own. That was great experience but not efficient. I’m glad I started with Sheppard, though, because of the self learning I went through in order to help with the memorization. King helped me visualize what was going on.
 
Depends! Learning comes from King, Sportys, Gleam, Gold Seal...
Crushing the written? That's all Sheppard Air.
 
YakDrvr said:
Can’t speak for all of them, but King is definitely an aviation industry provided home study course that will take them through all required topics (plus some) and does a decent job of prepping a student for instrument flying and the test. I would still recommend using Shepard Air afterwards to maximize your test score.
Click to expand...
FIFY

King courses are not ground training according to the FAA.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
FIFY

King courses are not ground training according to the FAA.
Click to expand...
I’ll have to look into the FAA ground training thing.

King emails a CFI endorsement for taking the written. The interesting thing is that Sheppard does not: they will if you ask, though.
 
Matthew said:
I started with Sheppard Air but really got tired of the repetition required to burn the answers in my head. I switched to King and liked it. With King I felt like I was learning and with Sheppard all I was doing was memorizing. If I wanted to learn something with Sheppard, to understand why a particular answer was correct, I had to research that on my own. That was great experience but not efficient. I’m glad I started with Sheppard, though, because of the self learning I went through in order to help with the memorization. King helped me visualize what was going on.
Click to expand...

I don't think Sheppard even tries to market themselves as a way to learn the material - that's not what they're about. They are very much a "memorize the answers" method, that's their niche, and I don't think they try to pretend they're anything else.

Whether or not anybody finds that useful or appropriate is a different issue. I wouldn't say Sheppard is in "competition" with any of the other actual "ground school" providers.
 
As someone mentioned above, for instrument training I did best with using the King videos and online content (I mean, who doesn't like watching John and Martha age as you watch :lol:) to learn the material and Sheppard to memorize how to correctly answer some of the unanswerable questions and get exposed to essentially the full bank of test questions.
 
dfw11411 said:
As a boomer (self-taught, self-motivated) who owned training centers for complex software, I learned that different people learn in different ways. When I learned to fly, I read the manual, but found the on-line video courses to be the optimal means for me to learn the material. I then reviewed with my CFI to fully comprehend the topics. Then we flew to put those concepts into practice. That worked well for me.

I won’t criticize you as you’re clearly a successful and seasoned CFI, but your post seems to indicate a disdain for other ways to learn. This one student isn’t your failure, and it may not be theirs either. Augmenting your personal reaching style with videos might prove to be better for all your students.

I enjoyed the Jeppesen course.
Click to expand...
Where do you get "distain for other ways". No it is my personal preference you stated get all the manuals, all FAA handbooks, FAA AC's, AIM/FAR, ACS.... study and use some of the test prop books. No distain Sir. I am trying to help him and give him tools to study, skills to study, ways to learn and memorize and actualioze facts and cocepts. I just asked for recommending. Jeppesen got it. PS unbeknownst to me he has bought king and not impressed. Not sure he has watched the videos much but said they seem dated.

The fundamental of learning has not changed and have no contempt. Many of my past students in 20's and 30's with advanced technical degrees were on autopilot. I was their guide, Sensei, Sherpa to learning, but they self studied. Never had to say it twice. This 18 yr old is well an 18 yrs old, that I need to teach HOW to study, organize, focus, and put in the work. That is all Sir. I gave him a list of questions he must answer in writing with Ref. end of this month. He rebelled a little, but I have a channel to the parents and we are working as a team. I have to pusgh him like a kid frankly. THAT IS MY JOB with this student. He is more work. But I enjoy it.
 
Last edited:
MountainDude said:
I think that FlightInsight is the best, but watch some of their youtube videos and decide for yourself.
Click to expand...

Second this. Dan George's delivery is really good. He also runs pretty good discounts for existing students. I bought some of his PPL courses and eventually got an offer to spend ~$250 to get lifetime access to all current and new courses. So now I have IFR, Commercial, Transition to glass, and anything else they publish.
 
Clip4 said:
None of those you list is a ground school. They are self study courses.
Click to expand...
Really?
"Ground school is a series of lectures and courses that teach students the theoretical knowledge needed to fly an airplane safely. It's a vital part of flight training and has been since the Wright Brothers opened the first flight school in 1910."

So you are being pedantic. In 2024, internet, school and work from home by laptop.... These companies even call their program GROIND SCHOOL. You are confused maybe thinking you need in person class to be ground school? Electronic lectures, videos is a form of ground school. Yes lectures, not taking and reading books is traditional. Not sure why I am wasting time replying, but agree to disagree. Do you have a "self study" company you like?
 
Last edited:
Gess said:
Second this. Dan George's delivery is really good. He also runs pretty good discounts for existing students. I bought some of his PPL courses and eventually got an offer to spend ~$250 to get lifetime access to all current and new courses. So now I have IFR, Commercial, Transition to glass, and anything else they publish.
Click to expand...
I love his YT channel... I am leaning on pushing him that way or Gold Seal. He told me he bought king a while back. I am not a fan. I know these folks for 39 yrs since VHS days. Never bought it but seen some.
 
I think the distinction that @Clip4 is making is that you can't log the time taken in an online course. I think it's a distinction without a difference as completion of the courses and passing the quizzes does provide a certification to take the written.

Seems excessively pendantic.
 
write-stuff said:
That's an interesting proposition. What are they, then?
Click to expand...


In general“Home study curriculum”, specially an “industry-provided aviation self study course (AC61.65H). While the technology has changed, the product is a correspondence course.

The “aviation enterprise” is required to provide study material, develop a comprehensive test and a graduation certificate that corresponds to the certificate or rating sought. The comprehensive test must be completed and sent to the provider for grading before the graduation certificate is issued and signed by “certified flight instructor”.

A school is both the educational institution and building designed to provide learning spaces, learning environments and for the teaching of students under the direction of teachers. This is why the FAA has facility and attendance requirements for approved schools.

I don’t believe you will find many educators who will say a home correspondence course is the equivalent of in person training, although society does its best to accommodate busy schedules and economic demands.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
In general“Home study curriculum”, specially an “industry-provided aviation self study course (AC61.65H). While the technology has changed, the product is a correspondence course.

The “aviation enterprise” is required to provide study material, develop a comprehensive test and a graduation certificate that corresponds to the certificate or rating sought. The comprehensive test must be completed and sent to the provider for grading before the graduation certificate is issued and signed by “certified flight instructor”.

I don’t believe you will find many educators who will say a home correspondence course is the equivalent of in person training.
Click to expand...
You are being pedantic and picking nits that don't need to be picked. You just made a strawman and non sequitur missing two things.

One you say correspondence is not equivalent to in person. Irrelevant and your opinion. That has nothing to do with calling it a GROUND SCHOOL. Reference from the FAA please? Yes IN PERSON by a skilled Ground Instructor can be best. Stand up instruction by a boring twit who can't teach is not good, even if it is GROUND SCHOOL by your definition. I taught at Flight Schools, Boeing and Airlines, cockpit and classroom, of what we pilots called the school house. Your need of yours to make this distinction is really not value added in my opinion.... We can agree to disagree. Please ANSWER what online course is best of ones mentioned?

Then you talk about a aviation enterprise? Where is that written. One of the Definitions of the WORD enterprise is an organization, especially a business. ALL of the online courses, self study, GROUND SCHOOL are businesses, with organization, have training material, exams and also CFI's on staff who DO endorse approval for written. You don't need brick and mortar to be a Ground School or in person standup lectures. This thing called the internet has made getting information easier and from home.

I have to go to the airport now to fly with my student. I filed an IFR flight plan, can't be late, one LOC and one LPV for my student. Bye
 
fly4usa said:
You are being pedantic and picking nits that don't need to be picked. You just made a strawman and non sequitur missing two things.

One you say correspondence is not equivalent to in person. Irrelevant and your opinion. That has nothing to do with calling it a GROUND SCHOOL. Reference from the FAA please? Yes IN PERSON by a skilled Ground Instructor can be best. Stand up instruction by a boring twit who can't teach is not good, even if it is GROUND SCHOOL by your definition. I taught at Flight Schools, Boeing and Airlines, cockpit and classroom, of what we pilots called the school house. Your need of yours to make this distinction is really not value added in my opinion.... We can agree to disagree. Please ANSWER what online course is best of ones mentioned?

Then you talk about a aviation enterprise? Where is that written. One of the Definitions of the WORD enterprise is an organization, especially a business. ALL of the online courses, self study, GROUND SCHOOL are businesses, with organization, have training material, exams and also CFI's on staff who DO endorse approval for written. You don't need brick and mortar to be a Ground School or in person standup lectures. This thing called the internet has made getting information easier and from home.

I have to go to the airport now to fly with my student. I filed an IFR flight plan, can't be late, one LOC and one LPV for my student. By
Click to expand...
Maybe irrelevant in your opinion, but not FAA’s opinion. Part 141 programs basically trade additional training for reduced experience.

In the private, it is rather meaningless if one uses 61 or 141. But, it isn’t meaningless for the instrument and going to cost more money vs 61 with a home study ground.

For the flight instructor certificate under Part 61, if the applicant has logged ground training for 61.185 (2) and (3), they have met this requirement. As good as you think self study is, the FAA doesn’t recognize home study for this.

(a) A person who is applying for a flight instructor certificate must receive and log ground training from an authorized instructor on:
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the fundamentals of instructing, including:
(i) The learning process;
(ii) Elements of effective teaching;
(iii) Student evaluation and testing;
(iv) Course development;
(v) Lesson planning; and
(vi) Classroom training techniques.
(2) The aeronautical knowledge areas for a recreational, private, and commercial pilot certificate applicable to the aircraft category for which flight instructor privileges are sought; and
(3) The aeronautical knowledge areas for the instrument rating applicable to the category for which instrument flight instructor privileges are sought.
 
Last edited:
Clip4 said:
Maybe irrelevant in your opinion, but not FAA’s opinion. Part 141 programs basically trade additional training for reduced experience.

In the private, it is rather meaningless if one uses 61 or 141. But, it isn’t meaningless for the instrument and going to cost more money vs 61 with a home study ground.

For the flight instructor certificate under Part 61, if the applicant has logged ground training for 61.185 (2) and (3), they have met this requirement. As good as you think self study is, the FAA doesn’t recognize home study for this.

(a) A person who is applying for a flight instructor certificate must receive and log ground training from an authorized instructor on:
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the fundamentals of instructing, including:
(i) The learning process;
(ii) Elements of effective teaching;
(iii) Student evaluation and testing;
(iv) Course development;
(v) Lesson planning; and
(vi) Classroom training techniques.
(2) The aeronautical knowledge areas for a recreational, private, and commercial pilot certificate applicable to the aircraft category for which flight instructor privileges are sought; and
(3) The aeronautical knowledge areas for the instrument rating applicable to the category for which instrument flight instructor privileges are sought.
Click to expand...
If your student were to complete the King course he has purchased he would receive a certificate showing he has met the FAA requirements signed by an authorized instructor. There would be no need for any further ground school.

I get he may not like the format. King schools doesn’t update videos unless changes to FARs have made them outdated. If your student is prepping for a career as a pro pilot, tell him to suck it up and finish his ground school ASAP. Distance learning is now standard across the industry and King is hardly the worst of it. If he’s just learning to fly for fun, than by all means blow more money on other products until he finds one that scratches his itch. As far as part 61 vs 141 costs, that’s a whole other debate that isn’t what you originally asked about.
 
YakDrvr said:
If your student were to complete the King course he has purchased he would receive a certificate showing he has met the FAA requirements signed by an authorized instructor. There would be no need for any further ground school.

I get he may not like the format. King schools doesn’t update videos unless changes to FARs have made them outdated. If your student is prepping for a career as a pro pilot, tell him to suck it up and finish his ground school ASAP. Distance learning is now standard across the industry and King is hardly the worst of it. If he’s just learning to fly for fun, than by all means blow more money on other products until he finds one that scratches his itch. As far as part 61 vs 141 costs, that’s a whole other debate that isn’t what you originally asked about.
Click to expand...

The person would receive a graduation certificate from a self study course, which is permitted to meet the requirements of several certificates. The boiler plate FAA language is a person who is applying for a pilot certificate must receive and log ground instruction from an authorized instructor or complete a home-study course on the aeronautical knowledge areas.

A person who is applying for a flight instructor certificate must receive and log ground training from an authorized instructor. 61.51 requires ground training received to be logged including the date and time given. The applicant can’t use a home study course to meet the ground training requirements for the CFI.

Sorry you don’t see the regulatory difference, but a lot of people thought the same thing about an instrument rating and the instrument training required for the commercial until it wasn’t.

Part 141 semi-self study courses are now approved by the FAA. It will be interesting what the FAA says about this for the 141 CFI candidate.
 
Last edited:
I’m not to the CFI stage, and probably never will be, but I know the King completion certificate says something like, “I certify xxx has met the requirements of yyy…” and it has an electronic signature from a CFI.

I don’t know what their online CFI course completion certificate says. That would be interesting to see what they say about it.

Edit: King has always been quick to respond to any questions I’ve had.
 
IMHO no substitute for reading the book and taking copious notes. Never understood how to learn watching a video, might be generational. Can't even type the material that become the notes - must be written. Worked for every rating for far.

Give student a chapter to read and take notes on, review with them, have them study further the bits not understood. Wash, rinse, repeat.
 
Clip4 said:
Maybe irrelevant in your opinion, but not FAA’s opinion. Part 141 programs basically trade additional training for reduced experience.

In the private, it is rather meaningless if one uses 61 or 141. But, it isn’t meaningless for the instrument and going to cost more money vs 61 with a home study ground.

For the flight instructor certificate under Part 61, if the applicant has logged ground training for 61.185 (2) and (3), they have met this requirement. As good as you think self study is, the FAA doesn’t recognize home study for this.

(a) A person who is applying for a flight instructor certificate must receive and log ground training from an authorized instructor on:
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the fundamentals of instructing, including:
(i) The learning process;
(ii) Elements of effective teaching;
(iii) Student evaluation and testing;
(iv) Course development;
(v) Lesson planning; and
(vi) Classroom training techniques.
(2) The aeronautical knowledge areas for a recreational, private, and commercial pilot certificate applicable to the aircraft category for which flight instructor privileges are sought; and
(3) The aeronautical knowledge areas for the instrument rating applicable to the category for which instrument flight instructor privileges are sought.
Click to expand...
OH MY GOSH,... We are not talking PART 141. You are making STRAWMAN arguments again. You are saying On Line Courses, "Ground School" are not Part 141. NO KIDDING. :rolleyes: You win. You are a winner and have told me. How could I be so wrong. Does it matter? No. What counts is meeting the FAR's and ACS, being competent, Safe, Legal and being EFFICENT.

I would argue Part 141 is not a lead pipe guarantee of turning out better pilots than "on line self study". I have had Pvts from Part 141 pilot mil and some were weak.

AGAIN MANY OF ON LINE PROGRAMS HAVE CFI'S AND ANS QUSTIONS AND SIGN THE PILOT approval to take WRITTEN. Further they guarantee the student/customer/pilot pass or gets money back and some double money back! Please educate yourself. They are a fantastic OPTION for some... Not everyone can go to a Part 141 schools. They are just not available in many locations.

I am teaching per Part 61 and 91. Let be blunt I will call it GROUND SCHOOL when I stand up IN front of the white board. If my student wants to call their $200 on line program Ground School I will not clutter their brain with the useless minutia you are talking about.

EVERY ONE OF THE the test and oral prep on line products CALL THEIR SELF GROUND SCHOOL...It is OK.

BTW do you work for or own a Part 141 Training business?
 
Last edited:
You’re still here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Matthew said:
I’m not to the CFI stage, and probably never will be, but I know the King completion certificate says something like, “I certify xxx has met the requirements of yyy…” and it has an electronic signature from a CFI.
Click to expand...

If you look closely, it is signed by a ground instructor or advanced ground instructor.
 
Walboy said:
If you look closely, it is signed by a ground instructor or advanced ground instructor.
Click to expand...
But I think it also has the FAR references on the certificate, too.

My question was, does this say specifically that it meets the definition of “ground school” for CFI training. I was wondering what specific FAR references were printed on the CFI training certificate.
 
Well, this is certainly an interesting, if convoluted discussion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top