R. E. Cassens, John P. Young, J. Greenan, James M. Brown
{"title":"Elements Related to Teaching Pilots Aeronautical Decision Making","authors":"R. E. Cassens, John P. Young, J. Greenan, James M. Brown","doi":"10.22488/OKSTATE.18.100415","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has placed increasing emphasis on aeronautical decision making (ADM) instruction, and it is critical that flight training schools ensure that their students are meeting and exceeding these requirements, especially since it has been shown that training in ADM can reduce the amount of errors caused by poor decision making (Berlin et al., 1982; Buch & Diehl, 1984; Buch, Lawton, & Livack, 1987; Connolly & Blackwell, 1989; Telfer, 1989). The goal of this study was to determine the status of ADM training at a collegiate flight training school and if there was any need for program improvement. Two surveys were used to define the ADM training environment. One survey was designed to determine the methods that professors believe should be used to teach ADM and the elements of ADM that should be included in instruction. A second survey focused on identifying methods and elements that were currently being used by flight instructors. The results of the surveys were then compared to determine if there were significant differences between what professors of aviation believed should be taught and what flight instructors were actually teaching in regards to ADM. The findings suggest that instructors were not consistently using the types of situations that allow students to practice decision making, nor were they consistently emphasizing the different types of elements that contribute to good decision making. Recommendations based on this research included: (a) analyzing the nature of ADM-related instruction at other collegiate flight training schools using similar methodology, (b) providing additional ADM-related ground and flight instruction, (c) determining the students’ perceptions of ADM instruction in the aircraft, and (d) adapting lesson plans to provide additional/more effective opportunities for students to practice ADM.","PeriodicalId":39089,"journal":{"name":"Collegiate Aviation Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"10-27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Collegiate Aviation Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22488/OKSTATE.18.100415","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has placed increasing emphasis on aeronautical decision making (ADM) instruction, and it is critical that flight training schools ensure that their students are meeting and exceeding these requirements, especially since it has been shown that training in ADM can reduce the amount of errors caused by poor decision making (Berlin et al., 1982; Buch & Diehl, 1984; Buch, Lawton, & Livack, 1987; Connolly & Blackwell, 1989; Telfer, 1989). The goal of this study was to determine the status of ADM training at a collegiate flight training school and if there was any need for program improvement. Two surveys were used to define the ADM training environment. One survey was designed to determine the methods that professors believe should be used to teach ADM and the elements of ADM that should be included in instruction. A second survey focused on identifying methods and elements that were currently being used by flight instructors. The results of the surveys were then compared to determine if there were significant differences between what professors of aviation believed should be taught and what flight instructors were actually teaching in regards to ADM. The findings suggest that instructors were not consistently using the types of situations that allow students to practice decision making, nor were they consistently emphasizing the different types of elements that contribute to good decision making. Recommendations based on this research included: (a) analyzing the nature of ADM-related instruction at other collegiate flight training schools using similar methodology, (b) providing additional ADM-related ground and flight instruction, (c) determining the students’ perceptions of ADM instruction in the aircraft, and (d) adapting lesson plans to provide additional/more effective opportunities for students to practice ADM.