English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between standardization and innovation in a university flight training program. Quantitative and qualitative data were generated for this investigation by a human subjects study involving senior students in a collegiate pro-pilot program. The survey provided the following lack of innovation indicators: (a) failure to achieve program goals; (b) loss of flight training students to competitor flight schools; and (c) substandard flight training efficiency. A model describing the balance between standardization and innovation is proposed: (a) too much standardization mires a flight school in stagnation; (b) too little standardization results in a lack of professionalism; (c) too much innovation creates a chaotic training program; (d) too little innovation produces unmotivated students; and (e) too many resistors to change at the management level results in stagnation and a lack of innovation. Flight schools that can achieve a good balance between standardization and innovation would enjoy two main benefits: (a) positive and imaginative learning atmosphere that encourages jnstructors to train their students above and beyond the minimum standards without sacrificing safety; and (b) exciting and creative training environment that motivates students to achieve their goals without sacrificing professionalism. Introduction Ptnpose With the advent of new pilot training initiatives such as the FAADndustry Training Standards (FITS) program and the introduction of Technically Advanced A&rafl (TAA), many flight schools in the flight training industry are Edced with the challenge of maintaining equilibrium between standardization and innovation. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the balance between standardization and innovation in a collegiate aviation flight training program. The objective of this research is to create a model ofthe relationship between . the values that promote creativity and the norms that induce stagnation in the flight training environment. We hope that an understanding of this standardization and innovation balance model might be beneficial to any aviation educators or flight school personnel trying to implement changes in their night training programs. Background Standardkition is essential to aviation safety and thus, to a great extent, is considered to be an advantageous and needed mechanism in flight schools. Collegiate flight training programs need standardization to turn out safe, professional pilots similar to airline operation. Standardization is what keeps a flight school from degenerating into chaos. Innovation is also generally considered to be beneficial. Without the creative and imaginative forces that drive innovation, it would be difficult for a flight school to adapt to new technology and to develop new training techniques. Innovation is needed in order to train pilots above and beyond the minimum standads. However, embracing standardization and innovation is not a pedagogical priority for some flight training institutes due to a variety of reasons. Research Problem The research problem can be characterized as follows: Collegiate flight schools may have an imbalance JAAER, Spring 2008 Psge 39 1 Wetmore et al.: Modeling the Balance between Standardization and Innovation in a Published by Scholarly Commons, 2008 St&dizatratron and innovation between standardization and innovation which stifles the learning principles of effect and intensity. This stifling of innovation results in a flight school management that is mired in stagnation and a flight instructor staff that is reticent to be either imaginative or creative during flight training. Data for this paper came from a human subjects study in a Part 141 collegiate aviation program. This investigation targeted the senior pro-pilot class because it was felt that they would have the best perspective on flight training issues in the flight school. This unique perspective is derived h m the fact that they have had four years of experience in trying to achieve their personal and departmental goals in the flight training program. This study generated both quantitative and qualitative data regarding standarcblion and innovation. The quantitative data came fiom a detailed examination of the student pilot logbooks. The qualitative data were derived fiom student pilot comments regarding the flight school. Research Questions To investigate the research problem, research questions were developed regarding flight training in a collegiate aviation program. These research questions are shown below: 1. What are some of the indications that a flight school lacks innovation? 2. Who are the main resistors to innovation in a flight school? 3. What are the characteristics of a flight school with too much or too little standardization? 4. What are the characteristics of a flight school with too much or too little innovation? 5. What are the benefits of a good balance between standardization and innovation in a flight school? Concurrent Lines of Znvestigation This paper is one of several studies generated by a larger, comprehensive research project utilizing National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Factual Report data and human subject surveys. This research project is concerned with aviation safety, Crew Resource Management (CRM), Aeronautical Decision-Making (ADM), and flight training issues. A brief summary of the main conclusions fiom these concurrent lines of investigation are pertinent to this paper: (a) non-flight related human error is the most significant direct hazard affecting FAR Part 121 airline safety (Lu, Przetak, & Wetmore, 2005); (b) hazardous attitudes have a detrimental e&ct on certain CRM skills Pasea such as risk-taking, decision-making, pilot error, and resource utilization (Wetmore & Lu, in press); (c) pilot age, young or old, has no measurable effect on ADM and CRM slrills (Wetmore & Lu, 2005a); (d) increased levels of pilot certification and flight experience significantly reduce displayed hazardous attitudes (Wetmore & Lu, 2005b); (e) certain pedagogical paradigms can have either ameliorating or exacerbating effects on ADM skiUs in the flight training environment (Wetmore, Lu & Caldwell, in-press); and (f) certain interpersonal conflict management styles can be either beneficial or hamhl when applied to student pilots with hazardous attitudes (Wetmore, Lu & Bos, 2006). Method Participants The target population of this study was the senior class of a collegiate aviation professional pilot program. Enrollment data were used to identify the 36 members of tbis senior class. All 36 senior students were invited to participate. Ofthese, 33 students (92%) agreed to participate and completed the survey instruments. With a sample of 33 and a population of 36, the survey results have a confidence interval of i 6.5% at the 99% confidence level. Participation in the study was completely voluntary and anonymous. The identity of the participants cannot be connected with the responses to the survey. The participants were not compensated in any way and were fiee to withdraw from the study at any time. Procedure The study participants were given a single-stage survey (Creswell, 2003) to complete that consisted of four sections: (a) general information such as total time, dual time, Pilot In Command (PIC) time, number of weeks in the program, and details about the types and numbers of certificates and ratings earned; (b) flight training program questions concerning such subjects as flight instruction, aircraft, scheduling, maintenance, finmces, academics, advisement, and flight school culture; (c) blank sheet of paper entitled "comments"; and (d) spreadsheet for the recording of logbook information such as total flight time versus calendar time, flight training delays, stage-checks, and check-rides. This investigation utilizes the quantitative logbook data and the qualitative comments generated by the survey as they relate to standadzation and innovation. The majority of the participants (97%) contributed comments to the survey. Validity Intend validity (Wiersma & Jm, 2005) for this study is indicated by a 92% response rate and a confidence interval of zt 6.5% at the 99% confidence level. The

Modeling the Balance between Standardization and Innovation in a Flight School