Instructor Effectiveness

On Sep 12, 2:01*pm, "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote:
Ongoing discussion regarding different techniques. Do we do it with a
touchy feely softly spoken and oh my gosh thats just fine.....
Or do we do it with a harsh what in hell was that all about?
Who did you learn the most from and what was the drill?
Of course there is a different perspective from a civilian learning to
get over the fear of heights or unusual attitudes (as opposed to the
normal of right side up on the highway) and a military student pilot
who is going to be exposed to getting shot in the ass with a rocket
out in the field when they go operational.
What has been most effective for you? The teacher who spent time
explaining what you were trying to learn and how it works, or the one
who just demanded you do the syllabus? How much time did you have to
spend one on one? Or did you even get that opportunity?
Did you have to learn under pressure or did you have the luxury of a
year or two to get to step one? Was it even important to you to get to
step one or two? What was the motivation? Was it for personal
satisfaction? Was it because of familial pressure?
Lots of factors to consider that impact instructor effectiveness.and
student learning.
Should be interesting to discuss.
Ol S&B
CFII/RAM AIGI - Original CFI in 1967

The type of student should affect the Instructor's teaching
style more than anything. To be nothing but gracious and gentle is to
ask for trouble from the arrogant know-it-all, and to be an abrasive,
critical and noisy instructor is only going to lose many of the
students. Maybe all of them.
I've had students who lacked confidence or had irrational
fears, so going easy on them at first and working them harder as they
got the hang of it worked for me. Some needed to be told frequently
that they were progressing OK. The student who already knew it all, or
who had no respect for authority, had to be worked very hard until he
got the idea that he really didn't know it all like he thought he did.
If he had anti-authority problems, he might need to be told to go
elsewhere and bust someone else's rules and airplanes.

Dan

On Sep 12, 3:28*pm, wrote:
On Sep 12, 2:01*pm, "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote:





Ongoing discussion regarding different techniques. Do we do it with a
touchy feely softly spoken and oh my gosh thats just fine.....
Or do we do it with a harsh what in hell was that all about?
Who did you learn the most from and what was the drill?
Of course there is a different perspective from a civilian learning to
get over the fear of heights or unusual attitudes (as opposed to the
normal of right side up on the highway) and a military student pilot
who is going to be exposed to getting shot in the ass with a rocket
out in the field when they go operational.
What has been most effective for you? The teacher who spent time
explaining what you were trying to learn and how it works, or the one
who just demanded you do the syllabus? How much time did you have to
spend one on one? Or did you even get that opportunity?
Did you have to learn under pressure or did you have the luxury of a
year or two to get to step one? Was it even important to you to get to
step one or two? What was the motivation? Was it for personal
satisfaction? Was it because of familial pressure?
Lots of factors to consider that impact instructor effectiveness.and
student learning.
Should be interesting to discuss.
Ol S&B
CFII/RAM AIGI - Original CFI in 1967

* * * *The type of student should affect the Instructor's teaching
style more than anything. To be nothing but gracious and gentle is to
ask for trouble from the arrogant know-it-all, and to be an abrasive,
critical and noisy instructor is only going to lose many of the
students. Maybe all of them.
* * * * *I've had students who lacked confidence or had irrational
fears, so going easy on them at first and working them harder as they
got the hang of it worked for me. Some needed to be told frequently
that they were progressing OK. The student who already knew it all, or
who had no respect for authority, had to be worked very hard until he
got the idea that he really didn't know it all like he thought he did.
If he had anti-authority problems, he might need to be told to go
elsewhere and bust someone else's rules and airplanes.

* * * * *Dan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dan
Couldn't say it better!
Cheers
Ol S&B

"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message
...
Ongoing discussion regarding different techniques. Do we do it with a
touchy feely softly spoken and oh my gosh thats just fine.....
Or do we do it with a harsh what in hell was that all about?

I've had both. I found the "what in hell was that all about?" approach more
effective for me.

Instructors that are too nice may leave the student unaware of how vital it
is to perform with precision as a pilot. This is serious business. Your
life depends upon it.

f-newguy wrote:
"Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote in message
...
Ongoing discussion regarding different techniques. Do we do it with a
touchy feely softly spoken and oh my gosh thats just fine.....
Or do we do it with a harsh what in hell was that all about?

I've had both. I found the "what in hell was that all about?" approach more
effective for me.

Instructors that are too nice may leave the student unaware of how vital it
is to perform with precision as a pilot. This is serious business. Your
life depends upon it.


It's important to note that not cursing at a student is not to be
misconstrued into meaning that an instructor is being "too nice".
The way this issue has been presented by the original poster would infer
that through the use of his description countering his argument in favor
of his personal method. Instructors NOT cursing at students are
absolutely NOT being "too nice" by NOT cursing at students! This premise
if assumed is false.

--
Dudley Henriques

On Sep 12, 3:31*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

It's important to note that not cursing at a student is not to be
misconstrued into meaning that an instructor is being "too nice".
The way this issue has been presented by the original poster would infer
that through the use of his description countering his argument in favor
of his personal method. Instructors NOT cursing at students are
absolutely NOT being "too nice" by NOT cursing at students! This premise
if assumed is false.

I've also had instructors and examiners who would hit you on the hand
or shoulder when they didn't like something you were doing. Aside from
rubbing close shoulders there is no reason to touch your students in
the cockpit.

-Robert, CFII

Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Sep 12, 3:31 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

It's important to note that not cursing at a student is not to be
misconstrued into meaning that an instructor is being "too nice".
The way this issue has been presented by the original poster would infer
that through the use of his description countering his argument in favor
of his personal method. Instructors NOT cursing at students are
absolutely NOT being "too nice" by NOT cursing at students! This premise
if assumed is false.

I've also had instructors and examiners who would hit you on the hand
or shoulder when they didn't like something you were doing. Aside from
rubbing close shoulders there is no reason to touch your students in
the cockpit.

-Robert, CFII

I agree. My preferred method is to gauge the way I project with a
student based on my read on that specific student's ability to receive
what I'm projecting and the tone with which I'm projecting it.
This method of controlling "tone" is very important in the teaching
cockpit, as the "classroom" is moving and all instruction is being given
while this dynamic environment is on going.
It's fine to upscale the tone of a verbal exchange with a student to
stress necessity and/or a time constraint, but this raising of the
"tone" by the instructor should never in my opinion cross the line that
separates the need for action from abuse. Shouting and/or cursing at a
student in the cockpit in my opinion adds to the student's stress level
and degrades their performance.
What I'm stressing here is that not cursing at a student goes MUCH
further than the respect issue. It's actually a quality of instruction
issue and as such I place it high on the list of things that instructors
should learn to do correctly.

--
Dudley Henriques

On Sep 12, 5:01*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

What I'm stressing here is that not cursing at a student goes MUCH
further than the respect issue. It's actually a quality of instruction
issue and as such I place it high on the list of things that instructors
should learn to do correctly.

Generally agreed, but I would argue that you can't have quality of
instruction without respect.

-Robert

On Sep 12, 2:01*pm, "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote:
Ongoing discussion regarding different techniques. Do we do it with a
touchy feely softly spoken and oh my gosh thats just fine.....
Or do we do it with a harsh what in hell was that all about?
Who did you learn the most from and what was the drill?
Of course there is a different perspective from a civilian learning to
get over the fear of heights or unusual attitudes (as opposed to the
normal of right side up on the highway) and a military student pilot
who is going to be exposed to getting shot in the ass with a rocket
out in the field when they go operational.
What has been most effective for you? The teacher who spent time
explaining what you were trying to learn and how it works, or the one
who just demanded you do the syllabus? How much time did you have to
spend one on one? Or did you even get that opportunity?
Did you have to learn under pressure or did you have the luxury of a
year or two to get to step one? Was it even important to you to get to
step one or two? What was the motivation? Was it for personal
satisfaction? Was it because of familial pressure?
Lots of factors to consider that impact instructor effectiveness.and
student learning.
Should be interesting to discuss.
Ol S&B
CFII/RAM AIGI - Original CFI in 1967

I have noticed that students typically want to be good pilots. They
know when they've made a bad landing, and they are willing to look at
themselves critically to improve their skill. If the student makes a
bad landing, they don't need me there pounding it into their head
constantly. If I were to do that, all I'm doing is making them more
frustrated, which is making it harder for them to focus and learn.

Also, I think sometimes people confuse "strictness" with "harshness".
You can still hold high standards and strive for perfection without
being harsh or rude. A lot of less experienced instructors will say to
themselves "I want to be an instructor that holds high standards", so
they'll go out and just constantly bitch at anything and everything
the student does thats less than perfect. Some students will react
like "Oh wow I really need to turn it up here", while other students
(in my opinion, most students), will respond with "this guy has
problems, I wish he would just shut up"

On Sep 12, 8:38*pm, buttman wrote:
On Sep 12, 2:01*pm, "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote:



Ongoing discussion regarding different techniques. Do we do it with a
touchy feely softly spoken and oh my gosh thats just fine.....
Or do we do it with a harsh what in hell was that all about?
Who did you learn the most from and what was the drill?
Of course there is a different perspective from a civilian learning to
get over the fear of heights or unusual attitudes (as opposed to the
normal of right side up on the highway) and a military student pilot
who is going to be exposed to getting shot in the ass with a rocket
out in the field when they go operational.
What has been most effective for you? The teacher who spent time
explaining what you were trying to learn and how it works, or the one
who just demanded you do the syllabus? How much time did you have to
spend one on one? Or did you even get that opportunity?
Did you have to learn under pressure or did you have the luxury of a
year or two to get to step one? Was it even important to you to get to
step one or two? What was the motivation? Was it for personal
satisfaction? Was it because of familial pressure?
Lots of factors to consider that impact instructor effectiveness.and
student learning.
Should be interesting to discuss.
Ol S&B
CFII/RAM AIGI - Original CFI in 1967

I have noticed that students typically want to be good pilots. They
know when they've made a bad landing, and they are willing to look at
themselves critically to improve their skill. If the student makes a
bad landing, they don't need me there pounding it into their head
constantly. If I were to do that, all I'm doing is making them more
frustrated, which is making it harder for them to focus and learn.

Also, I think sometimes people confuse "strictness" with "harshness".
You can still hold high standards and strive for perfection without
being harsh or rude. A lot of less experienced instructors will say to
themselves "I want to be an instructor that holds high standards", so
they'll go out and just constantly bitch at anything and everything
the student does thats less than perfect. Some students will react
like "Oh wow I really need to turn it up here", while other students
(in my opinion, most students), will respond with "this guy has
problems, I wish he would just shut up"

The other alternative for a student is much more effective: "You're
fired." It is not used enough,not just with CFIs but with MDs and
others

a wrote:
On Sep 12, 8:38 pm, buttman wrote:
On Sep 12, 2:01 pm, "Ol Shy & Bashful" wrote:



Ongoing discussion regarding different techniques. Do we do it with a
touchy feely softly spoken and oh my gosh thats just fine.....
Or do we do it with a harsh what in hell was that all about?
Who did you learn the most from and what was the drill?
Of course there is a different perspective from a civilian learning to
get over the fear of heights or unusual attitudes (as opposed to the
normal of right side up on the highway) and a military student pilot
who is going to be exposed to getting shot in the ass with a rocket
out in the field when they go operational.
What has been most effective for you? The teacher who spent time
explaining what you were trying to learn and how it works, or the one
who just demanded you do the syllabus? How much time did you have to
spend one on one? Or did you even get that opportunity?
Did you have to learn under pressure or did you have the luxury of a
year or two to get to step one? Was it even important to you to get to
step one or two? What was the motivation? Was it for personal
satisfaction? Was it because of familial pressure?
Lots of factors to consider that impact instructor effectiveness.and
student learning.
Should be interesting to discuss.
Ol S&B
CFII/RAM AIGI - Original CFI in 1967
I have noticed that students typically want to be good pilots. They
know when they've made a bad landing, and they are willing to look at
themselves critically to improve their skill. If the student makes a
bad landing, they don't need me there pounding it into their head
constantly. If I were to do that, all I'm doing is making them more
frustrated, which is making it harder for them to focus and learn.

Also, I think sometimes people confuse "strictness" with "harshness".
You can still hold high standards and strive for perfection without
being harsh or rude. A lot of less experienced instructors will say to
themselves "I want to be an instructor that holds high standards", so
they'll go out and just constantly bitch at anything and everything
the student does thats less than perfect. Some students will react
like "Oh wow I really need to turn it up here", while other students
(in my opinion, most students), will respond with "this guy has
problems, I wish he would just shut up"

The other alternative for a student is much more effective: "You're
fired." It is not used enough,not just with CFIs but with MDs and
others

This is true, and addresses the respect issue. On the quality of
instruction issue, it's incumbent on the instructor to see that this
step is never necessary.

--
Dudley Henriques