Freelancing, in a sense

[KLB]

The class that I learned the most, the fastest in, was taught by people using fear and accountability as encouragement for learning.

I believe that there are indeed times that you want to say, "Johnny, that was a wonderful effort, however, it wasn't good enough . . . ", and there are times when you want to say, "johnny, you know how to land a freaking airplane, so I don't know why in the &^$* you're not doing it right. Fix it NOW".

Hey, sometimes it works!

:yeahthat:

 

[jtrain609]

Got nothin' for you boss, I'm just telling you that people that study psychology of education, or learning theory or whatever you want to call it, tossed this stuff a long, long time ago. What have they replaced it with? Dunno. I majored in philosophy at the university, not education or psychology. I don't have a solution for you, I'm simply stating that it's old hat, not taken as fact by psychologists anymore (nor has it been for a long, long time) and the FAA is pimping it on us with us being none the wiser.

I'm not saying there aren't a few good things in the FOI, but it's like learning about those range systems with the different tones that people used to fly with. Yeah, it was cool and cutting edge 50 years ago, but it's gone now. As with most things with the FAA, I think they don't replace this stuff because they are either inept (which is what I lean to), or they don't have time.

Think about it, when was the last time you looked at one of those cartoon looking weather charts that are on the written exams? Or maybe the last time you checked out a RADAT? The FAA isn't exactly great about staying on the latest and greatest with anything. Heck, they have problems getting themselves hip to the last 40 years of aviation.

 

[jrh]

I believe that there are indeed times that you want to say, "Johnny, that was a wonderful effort, however, it wasn't good enough . . . ", and there are times when you want to say, "johnny, you know how to land a freaking airplane, so I don't know why in the &^$* you're not doing it right. Fix it NOW".

Hey, sometimes it works!

Absolutely! Used in the right context, I don't see any reason that approach would contradict FOI principles though.

The FOI textbooks I've read have never said anything bad about being firm and honest.

 

[jrh]

I majored in philosophy at the university, not education or psychology.

Good...I'll see if I can use some of my recently acuired knowledge from PHIL204, Essentials of Critical Reasoning, to refute your argument then. That's the extent of my philosophical training!

I'm not saying there aren't a few good things in the FOI, but it's like learning about those range systems with the different tones that people used to fly with. Yeah, it was cool and cutting edge 50 years ago, but it's gone now.

I don't think that's an accurate analogy. The human mind doesn't change with time the way navigation technology changes. I'm sure psycologists have a deeper understanding of the human mind now than they did fifty years ago, but not THAT much deeper.

Think about it, when was the last time you looked at one of those cartoon looking weather charts that are on the written exams? Or maybe the last time you checked out a RADAT? The FAA isn't exactly great about staying on the latest and greatest with anything. Heck, they have problems getting themselves hip to the last 40 years of aviation.

I agree. The FAA is perpetually out of date. But just because FOI material is old doesn't make it irrelevant.

As I said before, I can see from my personal experience that the FOI principles work. They make sense.

To give some examples of what I'm talking about:
The FOI textbooks say to teach the student to not just memorize something, not just understand something, but to be able to apply it in the real world.
The textbooks say to break complicated tasks down into smaller "building blocks" to be constructed, one at a time.
The textbooks say to dress professionally and show up on time.
The textbooks say to give criticism that is objective, accurate, specific, timely, and doesn't personally attack the student.
The textbooks say a student needs to have food, water, shelter, feel safe, etc. before they can learn.

What is so crazy about these principles? What do you disagree with out of these?

To me, it sounds like your argument boils down to, "FOI material is no longer cutting edge, therefore it's irrelevant."

That just isn't the case. I can accept the fact that it might be old, and there might be more advanced understandings of how humans learn, but that doesn't mean the FOI material is irrelevant. Incomplete...maybe. But still very useful. Unless you can give some sort of evidence as to how modern research actually contradicts FOI material, your argument doesn't hold water.

 

[moxiepilot]

John H. - don't take this as criticism, because I have read many other posts of yours and respect what you have to say. However, in stating that the FOI is out of date because it references work from the beginning of the century would be doing psychology a disservice. Take for example:

Educational Psychology by Anita Woolfolk. This book was published in 2001 and references psychologists (and relevant research year) whose work is related to the FOI such as:

Piaget (1954-73), who theorized about cognitive development
Vygotsky(1900ish), social cognitivism / learning by observing others
Erikson(1963), self concept and self esteem
Kohlberg((1969), social interaction
Pavlov(1920), classical conditioning
Maslow(1968), needs and motivation
Aristotle (350 bce.), learning theory

So my point is generally that the knowledge gained by previous generations is incorporated into our current paradigm. However, current psychology is still based on information gained in the early and mid 1900's, so the FAA isn't as out of date as you might think.

 

[DE727UPS]

"taught by people using fear and accountability as encouragement for learning"

HAHA....that's what I like.

 

[jtrain609]

jrh,


Fair enough criticism, but you already answered yourself.

You're right, the human mind does not change; but our understanding of it does. You are also correct in my analogy is a weak one, and it was also ad hoc to be honest (but what isn't on a forum when you're not doing serious research?). My argument simply says that psychologists have discarded what Thorndike theorized.

My only proof is empirical. I handed my Dad a copy of my Gleim study guide for the FOI and asked him what he thought of it. He read the thing down, handed it back to me and said, and I quote, "It's a bunch of horse ****." I defer to the trained professional determining whether anything dealing with psychology is accurate or up to date. Honestly, that's all I've got and I don't really have the technical facility to argue beyond that. Want to argue political theory with me? Bring it, I've read so much John Locke we could go 'round and 'round for days. Psychology? I don't got much

So there ya go. I'd argue with you about the practical usage of the FOI, and we all know I love to argue, but to be real honest I try to keep my mouth shut about things I don't know a thing about. Thus far, I've got about one hour of dual given and I didn't study any psychology in school beyond the intro course so I don't have a leg to stand on.

Once I get some more dual given I'll get back to ya!

 

[DE727UPS]

"break complicated tasks down into smaller "building blocks" to be constructed, one at a time."

I like that one, common sense, don't need to read it in a book.

"dress professionally and show up on time"

I'm a loser. I wore sweats and a hoodie. What does what you wear have to do with it?

"give criticism that is objective, accurate, specific, timely, and doesn't personally attack the student"

Common sense, don't need to read it in a book, what does objective mean again?

"a student needs to have food, water, shelter, feel safe, etc. before they can learn"

Pure pychobabble I'm talking about. What does that have to do with anything? Am I supposed to ask the student if the want a big mac, a coke, need help paying the rent, or if I scare them?

 

[DE727UPS]

Somebody, somewhere, asked how are we supposed to teach new CFI's better without the FOI? What we need is a mentorship program by where successful, experienced, CFI's give on the job training/IOE to new CFI's. That's what I think we need.

 

[jtrain609]

Moxie,

Again, I'll only comment on what I know. Aristotle has been shown to be wrong about just about...well...everything...ever. There are professors that have made careers on ripping that guys writings apart. Other than that, I can't honestly comment about the folks you referenced because I have not read them.

But as far as folks getting referenced in a book, I will say that I wrote a paper about how communism is completely in line with Christian values and teachings. I even quoted and referenced the Bible! Oddly enough it turned out to be a pretty decent paper, the prof (a very conservative, very fundametanlist Christian) gave me an A on it and wanted to know when my book was coming out (he thought I was headed to graduate school). Does that mean Marx cared a bit about Jesus when he wrote the communist manifesto and He had an influence? I'll bet against that one pretty much any day.

So again, no argument out of me, I don't really know enough to go much further here.

 

[jrh]

"break complicated tasks down into smaller "building blocks" to be constructed, one at a time."

I like that one, common sense, don't need to read it in a book.

"dress professionally and show up on time"

I'm a loser. I wore sweats and a hoodie. What does what you wear have to do with it?

"give criticism that is objective, accurate, specific, timely, and doesn't personally attack the student"

Common sense, don't need to read it in a book, what does objective mean again?

"a student needs to have food, water, shelter, feel safe, etc. before they can learn"

Pure pychobabble I'm talking about. What does that have to do with anything? Am I supposed to ask the student if the want a big mac, a coke, need help paying the rent, or if I scare them?

Don, I totally agree with what you said. But here's the deal: How do you teach common sense? How do you test common sense? How do you pick apart and outline and define common sense? How do you make somebody aware of what should be common sense?

That's basically what FOI has done. I can't count the number of times I was going through my instructor training, read some FOI stuff, and thought, "Geeze, that's so true...I'd never thought to break down such and such a concept into this nicely categorized, well-defined, listed out set of characteristics." The FOI made me very aware of what I already knew.

And that's why I think it's so valuable! So much is common sense, but there are all sorts of little details in the FOI that add on to that common sense and in a way, makes common sense more memorable. It's sort of like running a checklist on common sense to make sure you cover and remember every aspect of it.

For instance, the point about students learning best when they aren't scared. Sure, that's psycobabble, but being reminded of that fact through the FOI has had a direct impact on the way I teach. I make sure to ask new students how they are doing a couple times during their first flight. I give very detailed preflight briefings before introducing things like stalls and spins, including talking about what they'll see, hear, and feel during the maneuver, because I know those are the kinds of things that put the student at ease. But the the thing is, I might not have thought to do those little details if I hadn't had that FOI training. And that's just one of many examples I could give.

Here's something else I've noticed about you in particular, Don: you have a lot of common sense, and that gets you through life just fine. Unfortunately, what's common sense for you and me might not be common sense to the next guy. Just because you don't need to read it in a book doesn't mean everybody is that way. I'm sure we've both seen pilots who suck because they just "don't get it." What should be done with people like that? It's impossible to teach common sense, but with time, almost anybody can be taught the FOI material and become a better teacher.

So here's what I'm trying to say. For how much the FOI sounds like cheezy psycobabble, it's still an important, useful tool for training instructors. The key is to look past the weird, formal language that it has and see it for the underlying, real world scenarios that it deals with.

What we need is a mentorship program by where successful, experienced, CFI's give on the job training/IOE to new CFI's.

Excellent idea! To be accompanied by good ol' fashioned FOI studying, of course