ARECENTLY qualified Private Pilot, Charlotte Marcinko, has written a letter to the South African Civil Aviation Authority (SACAA) complaining about, what she perceives to be certain “shortfalls” in the Private Pilot Licensing (PPL) examination system. Her letter of complaint (which can be found on Page 69, “Airmail”), raises two concerns.
Firstly, she complains of a lack of quality study material to enable students to properly prepare for the PPL examination. She argues that available study material contains very little substance and therefore “teaches” very little understanding of the relevant subject. She believes that this could translate into lower standards of flight safety, as the pilots produced by the current system will know their flight theory rather than properly understand and be able to apply the concepts.
Her second concern relates to the “poor quality” of the multiple choice questions in the PPL examination. She alleges that the multiple choice questions are too ambiguous, with more than one possible answer being correct. Although she notes that multiple choice questioning is used by many civil aviation authorities throughout the world, she argues that an examination requiring written, analytical answers from students is preferable to any multiple choice type examination.
She argues, too, that examination by way of reasoned written answers better demonstrates a student’s understanding of the subject instead of encouraging a culture of parrot fashion learning as is the case with the multiple choice system. Charlotte Marcinko seeks an appointment with the SACAA to discuss these issues with officialdom. On the face of it, there seems to be merit in Charlotte’s arguments. However, when considering these complaints, to be fair, one needs also to take into account how the SACAA has dealt with implanting the online PPL examination system to date. Consideration must also be given to a major policy consideration that will impact on the amount of substance to be included in the theoretical knowledge testing of pilots in South Africa. These are the issues analysed below.
It must be remembered that the current online PPL theoretical exmination system is relatively new and has only been in operation for a couple of years. Prior to the SACAA reasserting control over the PPL examinations, each flight training school was mandated to set, invigilate and mark their own Private Pilot theoretical examinations.
This situation had existed for decades. Unfortunately, over time, the standards between schools became too varied and certain irregular practises by some schools crept into the system. As a result of pressure from ICAO, the SACAA was forced to resume control of the PPL examinations. However, all other aspects of theoretical training such as the preparation of study material and presentation of ground school courses remained the responsibility of the flight training schools.
To offset the loss of control over the examinations, the SACAA granted certain flight training schools the right, at own cost, to establish their own internet-based testing stations where students could sit and have the examinations marked on line. As with anything new, the implementation of the PPL online examination system was beset with a fair number of teething problems.
For the first two years that the system was in operation, the SACAA was inundated with complaints ranging from the examination questions being too hard and too many students failing, to the cost of the examinations being too expensive.
Much time and effort by the SACAA has been taken up in protecting the security of the system. The SACAA has uncovered instances where certain individuals attempted to hack into the system in order to copy the examination question database. Also, certain flight training schools failed to maintain the confidentiality of access passwords resulting in situations where students tried to access the online system from internet cafes.
These types of things just should not happen and reflect badly against the whole sector. Generally speaking, the staff of the SACAA Personnel Licensing Standards Department have been willing to listen to comments and criticisms from the industry and have tried their best to resolve each complaint and challenge as and when they have arisen.
There also seems to be an acknowledgement among these staff members that there are still many imperfections and problems with the PPL examination system and that the project is still work-inprogress. This mindset augers well for someone like Charlotte being able to constructively engage with the SACAA regarding her complaints and opinions.
As indicated above, there is one issue central to Ms Marcinko’s complaints, where the SACAA needs to formulate a clear and unambiguous policy. In her letter, Charlotte, refers to the importance of “substance” that conveys understanding in the theoretical knowledge training of pilots. This leads on to the international debate surrounding the emphasis that should be given to theoretical knowledge training and how this issue forms the basic difference between the pilot licensing systems used by the United States and Europe.
The European JAA system emphasises formal theoretical knowledge training along with skill testing. In sharp contrast, the FAA system of aircrew certification emphasises skill testing, which individualises the training and improves theoretical knowledge. However, generally speaking, the JAA system places far more emphasises on theoretical knowledge than the FAA system.
In South Africa, adherents and supporters of both systems exist within the flight training sector and the SACAA. During the 15-year long process to draft a new Part 61 to the Civil Aviation Regulations (CAR), the debate over whether to adopt an FAA or JAA approach to pilot licensing standards came constantly to the fore. This is one reason why the consultation process took so long to complete. In the end, the new Part 61 is a hybrid of the two systems – although it probably leans far more towards the JAA than the FAA system.
However, the promulgation of the new Part 61 has not silenced the adherents of the FAA school, nor brought to an end the debate over the role of theoretical training vis a vis practical flight training. The supporters of the FAA system within the SACAA remain dissatisfied with the new Part 61 and continue to lobby for its replacement in toto by an “ICAO-compliant” set of FAA-based pilot licensing regulations. They have even managed to convince the current Director of Civil Aviation that this is the preferred path.
The threat of this change indicates that South Africa has not yet finalised its policy on the role and “weighting” to be given to theoretical knowledge training in pilot training and therefore the emphasis of “substance ” and “understanding” vis a vis “rote learning” in such theoretical training. We therefore need, once and for all, to finalise our policy on what approach we are going to follow so that we can align our training materials and examination questions, accordingly. We congratulate young Charlotte for showing an interest in this most important issue. Surely she should be afforded the interview she seeks with the SACAA so that her views on these matters can taken into account?
