[ QUOTE ]
Oh yeah, I went to Riddle out in PRC.
It's a good school with a good flight program, but I don't necessarily think it gave me a big edge. The one thing that I'm highly upset with ERAU about is how high tuition and flight costs are now.
When I started at ERAU, it was $1,800/semester, a 172 costed $50 and a PA44 was $120.
Good program, good people, but watching the tuition and fees skyrocket over the years really rubbed me the wrong way. I would have also preferred a more challenging core education program (I don't know if it's changed much since graduating in 1993). I dunno, I prepped myself in order to qualify for a UC (Univ of California) campus and loved mathematics, but found the math courses to be at a Freshman year of HS level. Most of the students liked it because they were there to fly, but I wanted more of a well-rounded education.
I think it can be a fantastic program if they bring the costs into check, laregely broaden the non-flying curriculum and focus on producing a well-rounded, college-educated graduate with a bachelor of science, with emphasis in flight, rather than a good pilot that also has a four year degree in whatever.
Looking back, I think I'd prefer they reinvent the curriculum from having 'aeronautical science' into a curriculum where you choose a BS in engineering, computer science, business administration, etc and then add the 'flight option' as an elective.
So when you graduate, you have a useable degree, plus embry-riddle flight instruction.
I dunno, random thoughts. How are those paragraphs?
[/ QUOTE ]
How about having a backup degree/training?
Oh yeah, I went to Riddle out in PRC.
It's a good school with a good flight program, but I don't necessarily think it gave me a big edge. The one thing that I'm highly upset with ERAU about is how high tuition and flight costs are now.
When I started at ERAU, it was $1,800/semester, a 172 costed $50 and a PA44 was $120.
Good program, good people, but watching the tuition and fees skyrocket over the years really rubbed me the wrong way. I would have also preferred a more challenging core education program (I don't know if it's changed much since graduating in 1993). I dunno, I prepped myself in order to qualify for a UC (Univ of California) campus and loved mathematics, but found the math courses to be at a Freshman year of HS level. Most of the students liked it because they were there to fly, but I wanted more of a well-rounded education.
I think it can be a fantastic program if they bring the costs into check, laregely broaden the non-flying curriculum and focus on producing a well-rounded, college-educated graduate with a bachelor of science, with emphasis in flight, rather than a good pilot that also has a four year degree in whatever.
Looking back, I think I'd prefer they reinvent the curriculum from having 'aeronautical science' into a curriculum where you choose a BS in engineering, computer science, business administration, etc and then add the 'flight option' as an elective.
So when you graduate, you have a useable degree, plus embry-riddle flight instruction.
I dunno, random thoughts. How are those paragraphs?
[/ QUOTE ]
How about having a backup degree/training?