Clarification - Does everyone teach this way?

I looked at my original post and saw ample room for misinterpretation
because of what I left out and how poorly I explained that which I did
include. I'd like to clarify two points.

The first is that I wasn't criticizing any of the instructors. I was
expressing frustation at what I assumed to be a U.S. national standard
syllabus or teaching method.

When I described what I called the "I'll tell you what to do but I'm
not going to tell you how to do it" method, I failed to explain that
most of the instruction I've received DID NOT happen that way.
Usually the instructor explains the skill, I shadow the controls while
he does it then I get a shot at it. Sorry for the confusion.

Now I am completely confused. The things you originally mentioned that you felt were causing
problems in your training, you now say happened rarely. Please clarify further exactly what
has been so frustrating, so people can offer some help.

When learning to fly gliders, some things go smoothly and easily, other things seem impossible
at first. Most people usually get over all the hurdles, look back, and wonder why certain
things seemed so hard.

In general, changing instructors 4 times probably creates a needless hurdle, in and of itself.
It will certainly help any instructor if you make it clear how you best learn. There really is
no "standard teaching method," each instructor is different. And as far as syllabus, the FAA
has a list of things that an examiner chooses for you to perform during your oral and flight
test (called the PTS). Unfortunately, some instructors may not teach certain things (even if
they are in the PTS). BTW, the new Soaring manual published by the FAA is a large improvement
from anything previously available, in terms of a written "syllabus."

Not trying to sound critical, just sorry to hear about your frustration.

Jim Skydell

Oh come on. Anyone that has been around the hang gliding community (on the
web anyway) already knows what a boob "Dancebert" can be. A short Deja
search will clue anyone in on it..........
Yeah, I know you'll be ****ed but if you pull your pants down in public, you
have got to expect someone commenting on the pimples on your ass........




"Dancebert" wrote in message
...
I looked at my original post and saw ample room for misinterpretation
because of what I left out and how poorly I explained that which I did
include. I'd like to clarify two points.

The first is that I wasn't criticizing any of the instructors. I was
expressing frustation at what I assumed to be a U.S. national standard
syllabus or teaching method.

When I described what I called the "I'll tell you what to do but I'm
not going to tell you how to do it" method, I failed to explain that
most of the instruction I've received DID NOT happen that way.
Usually the instructor explains the skill, I shadow the controls while
he does it then I get a shot at it. Sorry for the confusion.

I should know better than posting something serious on USENET while
still hot under the collar. I should also know that I if I'm not
exact enough that people are going to read between the lines and come
to incorrect conclusions.

I never said I changed instructors 4 times, I said I've had 4
different instructors. The first school choose to teach me with two
different instructors. I choose to stop training there because it was
too hot. I had no problems with the school, in fact I've recommened
it to a couple of fellow hang glider pilots. So at the first school I
had 2 or 3 flights with two instructors. At the current school I've
had about 20 flights, 19 with the same instructor.

I never said I had any problems with the instructors, or that I was
looking for a new instructor, but that I was frustrated with what I
thought was a standard teaching method as they all used it. I've been
around the net long enough to know to rarely mention someone by name,
for fear of either not communicating clearly or being misinterpreted.
I know one of the instructors I've had reads this group, I hope you
haven't taken offense at anything I posted.

I consider my problem solved. Buck Wild pointed out to me that it's
by design. In computer programmer speak, 'that's not a bug, it's a
feature'.

On 20 Oct 2003 15:39:23 -0700, (Buck Wild) wrote:
.....
I never "taught anyone to fly", but I have guided many students
safely
while they learned it on their own, so to speak. That was my job. ...
You will learn more & better what you figure out on your own, than
what somebody tells you. ...

I'll take a new attitude into the sky this weekend, and see what
happens. Thanks for all the feedback.

Dancebert wrote:
I'll take a new attitude into the sky this weekend, and see what
happens. Thanks for all the feedback.

I have not read every single posting to this thread, but in what I did
read no one mentioned the idea of continually saying, out loud, what you
are thinking (as least much as you can, whatever seems most important at
the time - normally you are thinking about more things than can be fully
verbailized). Often the instructor only sees what you are doing and
must try to fill in the blanks, so I have found it useful to fill in
those blanks as much as possible and have gotten much valuable feedback
that way - and if there is an error in my thinking it is much more apt
to be pointed out. [In my experience, though, this is not something
that an instructor will suggest on their own.]

"J Goode" wrote in message y.com...
Oh come on. Anyone that has been around the hang gliding community (on the
web anyway) already knows what a boob "Dancebert" can be. A short Deja
search will clue anyone in on it..........

Wouldn't it have been more persuasive to point to specific posts where
boob qualities were demonstrated? Here is a Google query to get ya'll
started: (I would have provided a Deja search, but Google purchased
them last Feb.)

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=da...8&start=0&sa=N

Or, if you'd rather seach the web:
http://www.google.com/search?q=dance...&start=10&sa=N

J Goode wrote:
Oh come on. Anyone that has been around the hang gliding community (on the
web anyway) already knows what a boob "Dancebert" can be. A short Deja
search will clue anyone in on it..........

But on RAS the maturity level is a bit higher so we try to help others
who need it, not jump on them.

Jack Glendening wrote in message k.net...
J Goode wrote:
Oh come on. Anyone that has been around the hang gliding community (on the
web anyway) already knows what a boob "Dancebert" can be. A short Deja
search will clue anyone in on it..........

But on RAS the maturity level is a bit higher so we try to help others
who need it, not jump on them.

ROFLMAO

Lennie the Lurker wrote:
Jack Glendening wrote in message k.net...

J Goode wrote:

Oh come on. Anyone that has been around the hang gliding community (on the
web anyway) already knows what a boob "Dancebert" can be. A short Deja
search will clue anyone in on it..........

But on RAS the maturity level is a bit higher so we try to help others
who need it, not jump on them.


ROFLMAO

Of course, that's not to say that there are _no_ juviniles on RAS.

"Jack Glendening" wrote in message
nk.net...
Lennie the Lurker wrote:
Jack Glendening wrote in message
k.net...

J Goode wrote:

Oh come on. Anyone that has been around the hang gliding community (on
the
web anyway) already knows what a boob "Dancebert" can be. A short Deja
search will clue anyone in on it..........

But on RAS the maturity level is a bit higher so we try to help others
who need it, not jump on them.


ROFLMAO

Of course, that's not to say that there are _no_ juviniles on RAS.


ROFLMAO (but in agreement - - - good one, Jack!)

--
bumper - ZZ
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
to reply, the last half is right to left


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 10/9/2003