Publisher’s Note: Every once in awhile we receive a story that’s well enough written on a timely topic that we know we want to publish it after just the first read.
Meet Kyle and Linda Reynolds from Flight Level Group. Kyle is a business aviation pilot and his wife Linda is a teacher. Together they created a company calling for a return to learner-centered training in the business aviation world that focuses on the needs of the individual, not simply the demands of the regulator.
_________________________
Biz Av Pilots Have Eaten Enough [Training] Cake: The Coming Revolution in Aviation Training
There is a growing hunger among the brethren for flight and ground training that is meaningful, applicable and enjoyable.
And yet the response from the regulatory agencies is all too familiar, “let them eat cake!” So flight departments gorge themselves on the latest and greatest delicacies of technology, products or speakers in an attempt to appease regulators, allocate their training dollars, and impress their colleagues.
Despite these costly attempts to make the skies safer, a cloud of apathy keeps dampening the safety records. Experts say it is the human factor, the people themselves, which keeps the accident rate from further decline. Despite an ever increasing amount of training, people just don’t seem to be taking very much of it to heart. For those who are tired of eating cake, a bit of a revolution is beginning in the training industry.
Cognitive Overflow
One of the reasons training today brings lackluster results is that it focuses mainly on the cognitive domain (where training becomes understandable).
A steady diet of facts, data, processes and historical accounts is offered in order to increase knowledge. This is good to a point. However, so much emphasis has been placed on the acquisition of knowledge, that most people have experienced cognitive overflow. This is when the amount of data received is so quick and so extensive that there is not time to actually “think” about its validity and practicality. In fact, the cognitive stream often becomes so intense that people become grossly full and actually begin to have an aversion to more knowledge.
It’s easy to see why people become apathetic. If we accept the fact that an information diet is all a pilot needs, the cravings for something more will disappear. It’s more comfortable to be apathetic than hungry. If the aviation training industry is to grow stronger and increase in professionalism, training needs to address more than the cognitive domain. The affective domain (where training becomes meaningful) and the psychomotor domain (where training becomes applicable) also need to be activated each time a training event is held.
Case in Point
One corporate pilot recently commented at the conclusion of a safety seminar, “If you listen to too much of this stuff, you’d never get in the cockpit.”
This is cognitive overload. Without concrete examples of how the safety information can be used to make his department safer, this pilot decided to reject its validity. Who wouldn’t? It seems more sensible to forgo the safety seminars and keep one’s peace and confidence than to live in fear.
Aviation training must give pilots a wide variety of creative solutions to safety concerns. Pilots must be encouraged to modify these solutions and personalize them to the needs of their department. Without meaning and application, the knowledge instilled will pass through the recipient without bringing any lasting change. With meaning and application, safety reports and statistics can become a challenge to a creative means of sharpening skills, practices and procedures.
Consumer Addiction
Most flight departments have become consumer addicts. They wait for the next safety report or training mandate to be released in order to know how to direct their training dollars and gobble up the newest wave of products being advertised. Very little thought is put into creating a training program that actually meets the unique needs of the department and the individuals of which it is comprised. The idea of mixing up a training program that is based on the threats specific to the department is squelched by the hum of the drive thru crowd on their way to the next training event.
Oh, that flight departments would once again begin to evaluate their own needs, write training objectives to meet those needs and then evaluate the training experiences to see whether or not those needs were truly met. A fast from product driven consumerism and a diet of creativity could very well be the cure for apathy which is beginning to plague the training industry.
Case in point
A flight department recently decided to put their CRM and EVAC training to use.
They set up an emergency training day at their airport in coordination with their local fire and rescue department. Together they worked out an emergency plan and practiced it. The chief pilot recounted that it was a very successful day although the most impressive outcome came as a total surprise. He stated that the level of trust among his staff and the relationships that were established with the other professionals in their community was the greatest reward. He laughed as he considered the financial cost; not much more than several boxes of donuts.
Aviation training and flight departments must begin to find creative ways to tailor the training experience to each individual and the department and conditions in which they operate. Flight departments that become connoisseurs of collaboration and creativity will no longer be plagued by training apathy.
Back to the Revolution
There are those flight departments that are finding real food that satisfies. It’s not the fast food that we buy today down at the local training market. It is grown at home. It is sown by assessing the training needs of the flight department; the actual training needs, not just those mandated by outside sources. It is watered by practical training experiences tailored to the department and the individuals which comprise it. It is pruned by evaluations which indicate which training experiences were helpful and which were a waste of time and money. Those who grow such a program know it doesn’t come easily. But they also know that the fruit of their labor is much more satisfying than the delicacies of the past. It is meaningful, applicable, and enjoyable.
And even better yet, no one goes away hungry.
Join the revolution by sharing your training experiences or your vision for the future here at Jetwhine. You may also contact us personally with ideas, questions, and hearty debate or for help with your training needs.
Connect with Kyle and Linda Reynolds at: lreynolds@flightlevelgroup.com
It is refreshing to hear others join the call for customized, even individualized, training. Well done to the Reynolds! Operator specific training, with trainee specific focus opportunities is the only way to effectively meet the performance- based requirements of standards such as the IS-BAO and to realize the maximum effect from training dollars.
There is only so much you can learn from doing cookie cutter recurrents over and over again! Reynolds family, great work! This concept of training will hopefully turn training from a “box checking” exercise to one that is mentally engaging and challenging and not to mention a proactive safety safety measure. Very excited to see where this goes as it seems more and more people are getting excited about user centered training.
Thanks Scott and Vaughan. Everyone has a role to play and we’re excited about the possibilities of making training engaging, supportive, and meaningful to our colleagues.
Beyond earning my ratings, I’ve found that professional flight training has absolutely nothing to do with training, and everything to do with checking a box. At the airlines, the FAA will even show up occasionally to make sure you’re checking the box properly. It gets a little absurd watching them attentively analyze class seating, training materials, class hours, etc., while remaining ignorant to the fact that the class currently being conducted is absolutely useless. Airline training is nothing more than self-study interrupted by daily eight-hour classes.
Thanks Jason for sharing your experience. Box checking from the top down. This is the state of our current industry. I’d like to see how the general public would react if their family doctor only met minimum standards.