CFI Bootcamp or Venture North?

[ZebraPilot]

I have been struggling with my CFI training. I'm 48 years old, with a family and a full time job so there are a lot of external factors that get in my way. The unstructured approach at the local flight schools in my area haven't been working for me. So I am looking for a flight school with an accelerated, structured program to get me through the CFI Initial.

The ones that come up most frequently upon research are CFI Bootcamp and Venture North. Any thoughts or opinions on their programs?

By the way, if it matters at all I have no illusions about completing the certificate in 5 days. I doubt I could do that. If it takes 10 days, or 15 days, or even 20 days that's fine as long as there is a real program that allows me to march toward the goal.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

This is very true. The flying portion is the least of the worries. It is the ground portion that is the real challenge. One would think that once to the point of having a commercial rating they should have a grasp on the the information needed to teach. But I have seen first hand that is completely wrong. I have been coming across CFI students that make me question how they even passed their checkrides at all. I only equate that to they had garbage for CFIs to begin with and managed to make it past a DPE, or they did all their training at the pilot mills.

Yes, that seems puzzling. Especially since you will want to just teach from standardized lesson plans that cover each element of the CFI PTS for the particular item assigned. Once you have those, how do you miss?

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

Yes, all of that was home study for me as well. I poured through everything, including FAA legal interpretations and other obscure stuff. I was told you have to know it all. I also had my checkride with the FSDO (1998 ish). I am curious what is different today. Are you saying they need to know even more? That's not the sense I am getting from meeting the new CFIs.

The other thing which I have been told is rather different today is that the DPEs are encouraged to tell the applicant to teach a specific task in the CFI PTS and to cover every point there, rather than having the applicant give a lesson as they would to a student in real life. My understanding is that it used to be more focused on giving what would be a good lesson to a student.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

I’ve seen complaints here about busts on both sides of that…one that didn’t include everything because it would be more than one flight, and one that didn’t have a canned lesson plan because it was an aircraft checkout scenario or some such and he apparently couldn’t come up with a lesson plan.

Yes, it has probably become more difficult for the FAA with the DPEs giving these, rather than their employees. It may just be a skill set that it is hard to standardize testing for and still produce quality instructors.

Maybe one way to do it would be to have two components to the ground. An objective component, similar to the current ground session but with a reduced number of tasks to ensure the really essential factual materials are covered and then a component which tests an actual lesson plan or two as would be given to a student to test teaching ability.

Already this can be a crazy long ground session if the DPE is thorough so it seems like some shortening might be in order.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

The examiner has to make sure the applicant knows ow to ensure that all ACS points would be included, but I don’t believe all ACS points have to be taught during the oral, especially if it would comprise more than one flight lesson.

Apparently there is some contention over this point. I checked with the FSDO on this and initially was told that no, all the points for a specific task do not have to be covered in one lesson, as you suggest. OTOH, this might be interpreted to conflict with what is in the CFI PTS on page 7 in bold "Any Task selected for evaluation during a practical test must be evaluated in its entirety".

Likely the best solution as an applicant is simply to grind through all the points for a task while noting that this may not be the way one would teach it in a single lesson to a student. If one has prepared lesson plans, perhaps based on a purchased set, I don't see how one can miss.

I don’t know who is allegedly encouraging DPEs to do this, but it would be a very easy lesson to give if the mentoring CFI properly instructed the applicant. “Show me how your CFI taught you to give this lesson”.

I suspect it is an easy way for a DPE to run the test as they can just check off whether each item is mentioned. My understanding is that the FAA is encouraging this approach and that some local groups of DPEs are emphasizing this approach as well in their meetings.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

the applicant also has to know how to interview a learner (played by the DPE) to determine what elements would be appropriate and build a lesson plan for a checkout/flight review/IPC/whatever non-canned event the DPE may select.

It is a good idea, but I don't know that this is done much anymore. Some of the DPEs just want to have the applicant run through everything in the required tasks and just ask for that. Agreed that is not a good way to actually teach students and may be part of the mismatch that people are noting in this thread.

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

On the other hand, the note in the lesson task is that it would be taught as it would be to the student.

Certainly not the first time we've seen possible contradiction in the interpretation of FAA requirements

 

[PeterNSteinmetz]

I don’t see a contradiction…the “entire task” in the CFI PTS is the ability to teach the subject and identify common errors. “All the points” are in the Private or Commercial ACS, as appropriate. Those don’t all have to be covered in one lesson.

I agree with your interpretation. But some, if not most, of recent DPEs don't. They insist that all points must be covered in one lesson.

So I suspect it is best to tell CFI applicants, such as the future OP, that they should cover them all in one lesson. Likely the best default position until known otherwise.