Show of hands, please

jesse said:
The problem with all the faa publications that are available is that they can be really dry and it's really unlikely (nearly impossible) most students can read and discuss all the subjects in all of the publications competently.
Click to expand...

That was pretty much why I asked the question, Jesse, and the answers do not surprise me at all. The test writers fully expect that applicants will have read and assimilated the contents of more than a dozen pubs and to my mind that expectation is unreal.

There are two new questions in the private pilot bank on risk management (maybe other banks as well), and unless applicants go to Gleim, ASA, et al they will be blindsided.

Bob
 
And there in lies the pointlessness of the whole shabang.

FAA tests are so crazy or people are so lazy (maybe some of both) that people study out of the Gleim. They rote learn a test for the sake of passing a test. And the point of that is...?

I suppose it checks a box and allows them to progress to a CFI who might impart the knowledge and that in turn checks a box to move them along again to someone who will evaluate the applicant via an oral exam for required knowledge...maybe.

Bear in mind, I tend to like to provide solutions with my complaints, but in this case I don't know the solution.

I wonder if a risk management book actually changes behavior? I suppose I'd like to think it would, but sorta doubt it. Besides...it's hard to nail down when / if it came into play post event.
 
Last edited:
Bob - the 'more than a dozen pubs' being the ones listed in the PTS?

I was surprised when I came to study for my Private written that there is no published syllabus from the FAA.

61.105 is obviously not very detailed. Aside from listing publications in the PTS (assuming, and I may be assuming incorrectly, that those are the ones you are referring to) how could a useful and reasonable written test bank be defined?

Maybe the FAA could get more specific on which parts of those pubs they expect you to be familiar with. Clearly one doesn't need to know the whole AIM to operate safely as a PP-SEL (most of chapter 5 on Air Traffic Procedures is irrelevant to a non-IR pilot, for example).
 
DogDaddy said:
I have that book and I love it. I reread to it from time to time.
I have given copies as gifts to others as soon as they've passed their checkrides. I think there should be PPL test questions on risk management. I also think it should be discussed during the Flight Reviews (every 2 years).
Click to expand...

There are PPL test questions on risk management...that's what led me to post the question in the first place.

Bob
 
tiger said:
Bob - the 'more than a dozen pubs' being the ones listed in the PTS?

I was surprised when I came to study for my Private written that there is no published syllabus from the FAA.

61.105 is obviously not very detailed. Aside from listing publications in the PTS (assuming, and I may be assuming incorrectly, that those are the ones you are referring to) how could a useful and reasonable written test bank be defined?

Maybe the FAA could get more specific on which parts of those pubs they expect you to be familiar with. Clearly one doesn't need to know the whole AIM to operate safely as a PP-SEL (most of chapter 5 on Air Traffic Procedures is irrelevant to a non-IR pilot, for example).
Click to expand...

I didn't refer to the PTS listing because my question was about the written, not the practical. I look at ASA's list of references in its private test prep book.

The test writers want students to read the whole pub instead of specific selections because of (I think that I am inventing a term here) peripheral learning...that is, while read about closing flight plans in AIM 5-1-13 you might just read about how to change a flight plan in 5-1-11. (Lots of good stuff for VFR pilots in chapter 5.)

Bob
 
Fair point that the PTS listing shouldn't really be applicable to the written, I just wasn't aware of any other 'official' list of references. However, searching around I found the 'Knowledge Test Guides' which do list source material references:

http://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/airmen/test_guides/

I don't think I knew these documents existed (although I did just fine on my writtens!). But the PP guide doesn't list FAA-H-8083-2 anyway...
 
Everskyward said:
This was the case with the set of questions I had to answer too.
Click to expand...

CC: Stevel

The written exam is a probe of your rote memory and some understanding and application of the rote knowledge. The oral and practical exam is to probe your understanding, application, and correlation. So in essence, the FAA *is* following the FOI.
 
CFI.William said:
CC: Stevel

The written exam is a probe of your rote memory and some understanding and application of the rote knowledge. The oral and practical exam is to probe your understanding, application, and correlation. So in essence, the FAA *is* following the FOI.
Click to expand...

I tried to allude to it before. Rote learning should not be the test for Private. It is...but it shouldn't be.

Whenever I hear about an 'aced' PP exam I shudder. Personally I mark a 83% higher than an ace as I assume an ace used the Gliem and the 83% studied.


It's clear folk don't want to talk about this little aviation secret. I'll oblige. In the name of risk management I guess...
 
bobmrg said:
How many of you own, have access to, or even refer to, the Risk Management Handbook? Would you expect private pilot questions to be based on knowledge of its contents?

Bob Gardner
Click to expand...


No No No, but anything goes with the Feds. Pretty soon it will be irrelevant as we will not have gas, Government surveillance Drones will make flying unsafe.
 
Captain said:
I tried to allude to it before. Rote learning should not be the test for Private. It is...but it shouldn't be.

Whenever I hear about an 'aced' PP exam I shudder. Personally I mark a 83% higher than an ace as I assume an ace used the Gliem and the 83% studied.


It's clear folk don't want to talk about this little aviation secret. I'll oblige. In the name of risk management I guess...
Click to expand...

That's not necessarily true, and Gleim makes it easy to prevent by laying out their book so that the correct answer as well as explanation is on the next page. The problem is the same as any other, it's human nature to seek the easy way and to cheat.
 
denverpilot said:
Random thoughts:

Ben's comment that if CAP does something he does the opposite was funny, but a thinker will recognize that CAP does have a statistically significant lower rate of accidents flying more hours than most of the GA fleet. However, a thinker may also realize there's a lot of factors that apply and their safety culture may have far less to do with it than their proficiency... in other words, they fly more.
Click to expand...
What Ben (and other detractors of CAP) may not realize is that the Risk Mgt that CAP uses is not CAP-developed, but comes almost verbatim from the Air Force. Part of me thinks it's overdone for the CAP environment. On the other hand, because these are not people flying as much as AF and much lower performance than AF, it's not a bad idea.
 
murphey said:
What Ben (and other detractors of CAP) may not realize is that the Risk Mgt that CAP uses is not CAP-developed, but comes almost verbatim from the Air Force. Part of me thinks it's overdone for the CAP environment. On the other hand, because these are not people flying as much as AF and much lower performance than AF, it's not a bad idea.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Very little original thought is generated by the CAP. It is all dictated by Big Air Force.
 
Captain said:
I tried to allude to it before. Rote learning should not be the test for Private. It is...but it shouldn't be.

Whenever I hear about an 'aced' PP exam I shudder. Personally I mark a 83% higher than an ace as I assume an ace used the Gliem and the 83% studied.


It's clear folk don't want to talk about this little aviation secret. I'll oblige. In the name of risk management I guess...
Click to expand...
The two aren't necessarily exclusive, though, and as Henning says, using Gleim can also assist in understanding and prompt further detailed study of areas in which you are weaker. I admit that I used Gleim because I didn't want any 'surprises', but I also used the primary sources, and a few other private syllabus books - if you just memorized the (supposedly) 'right' answer from Gleim you'd be in for a very tough time on the oral portion.

And in fairness, some things in aviation really are just about rote learning. Cloud clearances etc. I mean, I have a good idea of why cloud clearances are different in different airspace classes, but understanding the principle is not going to help me to remember the precise values.

I'm guessing you were in the 83% range... :)
 
83% would have been a low score for me. I was usually high 80's. I missed 2 on my instrument. I did ace my ATP. But...I used the Gliem for that one test. Go figure.


My scores or your scores arent the point. Can an argument be made that studying the test and answers provides insight? I suppose. But I've always been taught that was cheating. If my kid was found with a school test and was 'studying' from it he'd be in big trouble.


Ive heard it became an issue due to FoIA. Groups demanded the FAA make the test available so they did under court order. Since the test got out the PP written went from a few questions to what it is today in an effort to make a leaked test still challenging. More questions and a larger test bank.

I don't know...that a story I heard in a hangar and have no idea to the truth.
 
I do risk management on my job because I'm required to do it. It's similar to the form we filled out in the Army. The forms don't accurately reflect what my true risk is (HEMS). It's low risk to land on a road in the mountains at night under NVGs and marginal VFR? It's imazing how many accidents we've had in the HEMS industry and I'm sure they all had a low risk value. To be anything greater than "low" I'd have to be flying at midnight on Dec 20 just before the zombie apocalypse.:wink2:

Risk management is great but a numerical value doesn't replace a pilots experience. I don't fill out a risk management form when I go fly my plane. I'm managing risk during the planning process by identifying in my head the risks associated with that particular flight. I then make a go/no go decision. I think by becoming "familiar with all available information concerning that flight," We are in essence doing risk management.
 
Captain said:
I tried to allude to it before. Rote learning should not be the test for Private. It is...but it shouldn't be.
Click to expand...

You can say the same for any FAA written exam. That's why when the FAA changed the written test bank, all the industry "test prep" publishers went ballistic. AOPA, Sporty's, King Schools, they all cried foul. I don't know why they would since the move will address this memorization only non-sense. Okay, so I do know why they'd cry foul...the FAA would hurt their money makers.

Alas, squeaky wheel gets the grease. But, the FAA is still moving forward in expanding their test banks to put a dent in all the rote memorization of test questions/answers. I don't believe this will ever be resolved, but, that's why the oral exists. It doesn't take 5 minutes of Q&A to see who studied, and who memorized.
 
There are way too many questions that just prove that you can regurgitate the correct vocabulary, and not nearly enough that probe your understanding of the concepts.
Click to expand...

sounds like the majority of my academic experience
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top