Do you have university degree?
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
Babel Fish
- Rank 3
- Posts: 171
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 12:53 pm
- Location: town to town, up and down the dial...
I've done both university and college (B.Sc. and an aviation dipl.) and I actually found the college program to be far more demading and challenging than unviersity. This isn't a blanket statement that applies to all college programs, but any engineering type of program (for example) would be far more challenging than any type of BA program (not trying to start a debate here, just giving my humble opinion). Would I recommend one over the other? Not sure. College is definitely more hands on and practical, which seems to appeal to employers, but for the most part seems to lack the "stature" that comes with a degree. And sometimes that piece of paper makes the difference as to whether or net you get the chance to prove yourself in an interview.Isis wrote:I agree that a University degree does show ability, willingness and percervierence (sp?) ... more so than a diploma? I'm not too sure. University is much more mentally challenging, where college tends to be hands on. The neat thing about aviation is that it's both - hands on as well as mentally demanding.
I like long walks, especially when they are taken by people who annoy me.
- Fred Allen
- Fred Allen
Re-read my post. I made no presumptions. I simply gave a sarcastic example of what you did: judged an entire group of individuals based on one (your admitance) pilot. However it was bad form to name the college, my apologies.water wings wrote:..i did not mention any names...so why did you presume i was talking about Seneca? hmmm?
The stereotype for Ontario grads (or any other type of pilot group) exists because people such as yourself promote it.
The other thing to remember about stereotypes is that they ARE stereotypes! One thing we do agree on is that pilots should be judged based on their skill - both physical and mental. Not on their background, or school training. Something that I've maintained throughout this topic.
It is not just colleges that do not allow practice on grass strips. There are private flight schools that also restrict it - thanks to the insurance companies.
- Isis
Keep Flyin'!
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
" The stereotype for Ontario grads (or any other type of pilot group) exists because people such as yourself promote it. "
From my experience with college grads in general far to many are experts in threory and hamhanded in piloting skills.
Cat
From my experience with college grads in general far to many are experts in threory and hamhanded in piloting skills.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
On an ideal level, the acquisition of a degree does supposedly demonstrate what has been stated here some time ago. That's a very generalized statement and I question it's premise based on my own Degree and having worked with those who have one and those who don't. Whether one can work well under pressure is NOT decided on the ability to obtain a classroom Degree. There are those who have done so and cannot operate under pressure at all. So I urge caution on generalizations in that regard. The ability to operate under pressure is more a personality trait and in the genes, than something than can be taught beyond a certain minimal level.
In reality, the requirement for a Degree is commonly used to another purpose also.........to drastically shorten the employment applications that arrive daily on desks where they have an over-abundance of them on a poor day and never "want" for prospective employees. It's used in many more places than aviation and serves it's purpose very well. Toronto Fire Dept was constantly inundated with massive amounts of applications and found them very time consuming to deal with. The answer was provided by the HR Dept when they increased the qualification for application from High School completion to the requirement of having a BSc. The numbers of applications dropped instantly and they had numbers that they could now deal with. It was felt that they would also acquire a somewhat better candidate, but alas, such has not proven to be true. At the end of training and thereafter, it was found that one could not tell the difference years later between the two backgrounds. I believe that this is one profession that has it's moments of "pressure".
Reversely, let the flow of applications become a major problem because there are few or none and then the qualifications for entrance begin to drop. In 1939, to become a pilot in the RCAF, one had to be an Officer and have finished High School or better......no exceptions. In 1941, a Sgt would be accepted to ITS training in Regina and not have finished High School at all and only have Grade X. They did not therefore get an inferior applicant and as normal, "the cream rose to the top" through the training that ensued, as it did for those that had finished High School and were themselves Officers.
In reality, the requirement for a Degree is commonly used to another purpose also.........to drastically shorten the employment applications that arrive daily on desks where they have an over-abundance of them on a poor day and never "want" for prospective employees. It's used in many more places than aviation and serves it's purpose very well. Toronto Fire Dept was constantly inundated with massive amounts of applications and found them very time consuming to deal with. The answer was provided by the HR Dept when they increased the qualification for application from High School completion to the requirement of having a BSc. The numbers of applications dropped instantly and they had numbers that they could now deal with. It was felt that they would also acquire a somewhat better candidate, but alas, such has not proven to be true. At the end of training and thereafter, it was found that one could not tell the difference years later between the two backgrounds. I believe that this is one profession that has it's moments of "pressure".
Reversely, let the flow of applications become a major problem because there are few or none and then the qualifications for entrance begin to drop. In 1939, to become a pilot in the RCAF, one had to be an Officer and have finished High School or better......no exceptions. In 1941, a Sgt would be accepted to ITS training in Regina and not have finished High School at all and only have Grade X. They did not therefore get an inferior applicant and as normal, "the cream rose to the top" through the training that ensued, as it did for those that had finished High School and were themselves Officers.
-
Kernal Klink
- Rank 1
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 3:30 pm
- Location: B.C.
Who cares what education you have... the only thing it's good for is pointing you in a general direction. The rest of the learning is up to the individual. Coming out of college or university you don't know F all about flying until you've worked in an air service and scared yourself a couple of times. That's called experience, which is most important education you can have. I've seen tons of kids come up looking for a job in the bush with a university degree, but they don't have a clue what a chainsaw is, or how to navigate without roads and powerlines. Flight time is what counts boys and girls. University = waste of money. College = Get an ENTRY level flying job.
-
circlingfor69
- Rank 2
- Posts: 87
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 5:59 pm
- Location: In a dark room
Kernel Klink
You are a F&*$in dumbass!!! I am soooo sick of a$$ holes like you sh%ting all over people who have degrees. You never hear people with degrees bashing college. Its only retards such as your self who are either threatened by people with degrees or are too stupid to see that as pilots these days we are more than just hands and feet drivers. Pilots are becoming more system managers than anything else. AC realizes this why else do you think they prefer degrees to college diplomas???????
My degree hasn't only helped me get an interview at AC it has given me a life experience I will have forever. Not to mention a very viable alternative if aviatin doesn't work out. So your idea that a University degree is a "waste of money" is hilarious. If it was such a waste of money guys like you wouldn't be writing post complaining about AC prefering degree applicants.
You are a F&*$in dumbass!!! I am soooo sick of a$$ holes like you sh%ting all over people who have degrees. You never hear people with degrees bashing college. Its only retards such as your self who are either threatened by people with degrees or are too stupid to see that as pilots these days we are more than just hands and feet drivers. Pilots are becoming more system managers than anything else. AC realizes this why else do you think they prefer degrees to college diplomas???????
My degree hasn't only helped me get an interview at AC it has given me a life experience I will have forever. Not to mention a very viable alternative if aviatin doesn't work out. So your idea that a University degree is a "waste of money" is hilarious. If it was such a waste of money guys like you wouldn't be writing post complaining about AC prefering degree applicants.
One feathered,the other on fire!
If one wants to a a "systems manager" then one better get a Degree of training in same. A BA is slanted toward Fine Arts and a BSc is slanted toward the Sciences. Neither one will assist a person in becoming a better CP, Check-Pilot, Ops Manager or Owner of an a/c or Air Service. If one wants to have that ability one must get something in a Business Degree, MBa or a Degree from an aviation-specific college where they have Degrees that specialize in that aviation-specific knowledge and training.
The University Degree means only that you have the intelligence to listen/read/study/absorb the written/verbal forms, came by the where-with-all to pay for those classes and had the oppotunity to do so time-wise. There is nothing, unless it's a Business Degree that specifically teaches you to manage anything whatsoever, except the local bus schedule to and from classes. Neither Degree will assist you in any manner whatsoever to to speed your learning ability to become a Captain on an Orly Airport-bound AC 747. Neither will they assist you in tour actions or speed of those actions when an emergency of some type makes that day "a bad hair day". The Degree will get you through the door to have an interview....and that's all. Extended knowledge for the future perhaps? Sorry that you have that belief because it ain't so. TWO years after you have obtained that vaunted Degree, 1/2 of what you learned is now obsolete, outdated and been superceded; FOUR years after you have obtained that Degree, practically all that you learned is now worthless and you better start making plans to "upgrade" that knowledge ot your in for a big surprise. Ergo, that's also the main reason that Universities are loaded these days with the 30 year old crowd who are returning to get back up to speed again. My nephew is one also and graduated 6 years ago from MeGill with a PhD in Computer Science and a PhD in Chemistry and specializes in computers. he advises that 85% of what he was taught and did his thesis on is now completely out of date and totally obsolete in his world. So get the Degree for what ever reason, valid or otherwise, but just remember that about 6 years later that knowlwdge learned is now obsolete and you aren't anymore knowledgeable that your brethern across the table who got his High School and was intelligent enough to do what you did, but didn't have the opportunity or finances to do so. The when I'm "passengering" with you I want the asshole that has the most experience and ability to fly me around because everything else has evened-out at that point. Let the "high-foreheads" at AC Human Resources "chew on that" for awhile because they KNOW that it isn't my opinion and can be all checked quite easily......which they did a lonnnnnng time ago and know anyway.
The University Degree means only that you have the intelligence to listen/read/study/absorb the written/verbal forms, came by the where-with-all to pay for those classes and had the oppotunity to do so time-wise. There is nothing, unless it's a Business Degree that specifically teaches you to manage anything whatsoever, except the local bus schedule to and from classes. Neither Degree will assist you in any manner whatsoever to to speed your learning ability to become a Captain on an Orly Airport-bound AC 747. Neither will they assist you in tour actions or speed of those actions when an emergency of some type makes that day "a bad hair day". The Degree will get you through the door to have an interview....and that's all. Extended knowledge for the future perhaps? Sorry that you have that belief because it ain't so. TWO years after you have obtained that vaunted Degree, 1/2 of what you learned is now obsolete, outdated and been superceded; FOUR years after you have obtained that Degree, practically all that you learned is now worthless and you better start making plans to "upgrade" that knowledge ot your in for a big surprise. Ergo, that's also the main reason that Universities are loaded these days with the 30 year old crowd who are returning to get back up to speed again. My nephew is one also and graduated 6 years ago from MeGill with a PhD in Computer Science and a PhD in Chemistry and specializes in computers. he advises that 85% of what he was taught and did his thesis on is now completely out of date and totally obsolete in his world. So get the Degree for what ever reason, valid or otherwise, but just remember that about 6 years later that knowlwdge learned is now obsolete and you aren't anymore knowledgeable that your brethern across the table who got his High School and was intelligent enough to do what you did, but didn't have the opportunity or finances to do so. The when I'm "passengering" with you I want the asshole that has the most experience and ability to fly me around because everything else has evened-out at that point. Let the "high-foreheads" at AC Human Resources "chew on that" for awhile because they KNOW that it isn't my opinion and can be all checked quite easily......which they did a lonnnnnng time ago and know anyway.
-
circlingfor69
- Rank 2
- Posts: 87
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 5:59 pm
- Location: In a dark room
LH
My point is that a person with a degree is more able to learn and retain the complex ideas associated with the modern aircraft systems. I didnt mean they are actual "system managers"!
PS~ I have a hard time taking critcism from someone who can't spell McGill!
My point is that a person with a degree is more able to learn and retain the complex ideas associated with the modern aircraft systems. I didnt mean they are actual "system managers"!
PS~ I have a hard time taking critcism from someone who can't spell McGill!
One feathered,the other on fire!
I wasn't criticizing you in particular because many think the same and was only responding to the "idea" and not "you".
We will also disagree on that ability to retain knowledge that you have just stated. If I graduated with Honours and a GPA of 3.9 and you graduated with a bare C average and required an extra year because of subject failures, then we can also have a debate again on who is marginal in that department and who isn't. Otherwise, we can state that everyone who passes their driving tests and obtain a Driver's License is of the same ability. In reality, all it means is that they have passed "the minimum acceptable standards as set down by the government". They may have taken 5 times to pass that test, but they are now considered equal to you who "aced it" on the first try. I wish all pilots were of the same ability that hold a license, but I learned long ago, doing Check-Pilot duties that that is grossly inaccurate. There are some out there who I wouldn't fly across the company parking lot with, but they hold the exact same license that I do. So I'd be extemely careful with that premise.
I also type 75 wpm and even obtaining that was a total of how many I made during a test. Consider "McGill" to be one of those because I know better, but "point made" and I happen to agree with you on that stand.
We will also disagree on that ability to retain knowledge that you have just stated. If I graduated with Honours and a GPA of 3.9 and you graduated with a bare C average and required an extra year because of subject failures, then we can also have a debate again on who is marginal in that department and who isn't. Otherwise, we can state that everyone who passes their driving tests and obtain a Driver's License is of the same ability. In reality, all it means is that they have passed "the minimum acceptable standards as set down by the government". They may have taken 5 times to pass that test, but they are now considered equal to you who "aced it" on the first try. I wish all pilots were of the same ability that hold a license, but I learned long ago, doing Check-Pilot duties that that is grossly inaccurate. There are some out there who I wouldn't fly across the company parking lot with, but they hold the exact same license that I do. So I'd be extemely careful with that premise.
I also type 75 wpm and even obtaining that was a total of how many I made during a test. Consider "McGill" to be one of those because I know better, but "point made" and I happen to agree with you on that stand.
-
tripleseven
- Rank 4
- Posts: 266
- Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 9:56 am
Nope. A BA degree is "slanted" to towards the humanities, a BFA is "slanted" towards the fine arts while a BSc is for the sciences. Three very different specializations that all deserve respect.LH wrote:If one wants to a a "systems manager" then one better get a Degree of training in same. A BA is slanted toward Fine Arts and a BSc is slanted toward the Sciences.
Your analogy regarding your nephew's obsolete skills and knowledge in Computer Science should not be used when referencing all degree programs. Very few industries have had the technology explosion that we have seen in IT/software/networking etc. Exponential growth is hard to keep up on.
The fact that people are returning to Universities to upgrade their specialization should not be something unfamiliar to a pilot who must do currency rides every 6 months on an aircraft he is supposedly an expert on! Plus retraining for different types, different company ops or procedures.
You unwittingly made a very astute point. Life is a continuous chance for learning. Do it and succeed or don't and become obsolete.
The "Arts" term was meant in a general way and I understand the differences. The BA of today is equivalent in many ways to a Grade XII when I went to school. The Grade XII's that my three kids obtained does not equal, in any sense whatsoever, the Grade XII I obtained.....and they were the ones that brought it to my attention and are still upset and vocal about it.
My wife is a High School teacher of some 30+ years and agrees totally with that statement. She's seen the education system deteriorate over the decades in all parts of the country and been vocal about it. She now conducts Saturday morning classes at university for Sophmores to learn how to write and form paragraphs. All of this because the Profs have had enough with papers handed-in that wouldn't do justice to a Grade 7 student. So does a BA deserve the respect it once did decades ago........certainly not. The attempt to gain one though, does deserve respect.
I also realize that not ALL disciplines must return to university for upgrading, but the majority of Degrees must get upgrading at some point and from somewhere. Granted, the world of IT has moved fast, but so has the world of Chemistry and new chemicals are being made and discovered everyday......and that's also one of the nephew's areas of expertise. I have a Business Degree and half of what I was taught is now outdated and at least 1/3 of that is totally useless anywhere. So is my Business Degree useless then? Not totally, but at least one half is and the rest is getting closer by the month. It taught me how to do certain things in the business world, but didn't do a "dang thing" for me at Check-out time or how to "grease that mother on" in a 30kt x-wind. I am also not any smarter now in general terms that I was before venturing forth to obtain that Degree. I just happen to be a little smarter about the business world than those who didn't have that training.......and certain acquaintances could argue that premise also.
The one item I did take particualr note of when attending university is that it houses some of the most ignorant people that I ever met. Knowledgeable in their own disciplines.....most defintely......but other than that there were many who couldn't find their own asses with two hands and a flashlight or balance their own cheque-book..
My wife is a High School teacher of some 30+ years and agrees totally with that statement. She's seen the education system deteriorate over the decades in all parts of the country and been vocal about it. She now conducts Saturday morning classes at university for Sophmores to learn how to write and form paragraphs. All of this because the Profs have had enough with papers handed-in that wouldn't do justice to a Grade 7 student. So does a BA deserve the respect it once did decades ago........certainly not. The attempt to gain one though, does deserve respect.
I also realize that not ALL disciplines must return to university for upgrading, but the majority of Degrees must get upgrading at some point and from somewhere. Granted, the world of IT has moved fast, but so has the world of Chemistry and new chemicals are being made and discovered everyday......and that's also one of the nephew's areas of expertise. I have a Business Degree and half of what I was taught is now outdated and at least 1/3 of that is totally useless anywhere. So is my Business Degree useless then? Not totally, but at least one half is and the rest is getting closer by the month. It taught me how to do certain things in the business world, but didn't do a "dang thing" for me at Check-out time or how to "grease that mother on" in a 30kt x-wind. I am also not any smarter now in general terms that I was before venturing forth to obtain that Degree. I just happen to be a little smarter about the business world than those who didn't have that training.......and certain acquaintances could argue that premise also.
The one item I did take particualr note of when attending university is that it houses some of the most ignorant people that I ever met. Knowledgeable in their own disciplines.....most defintely......but other than that there were many who couldn't find their own asses with two hands and a flashlight or balance their own cheque-book..
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
" My point is that a person with a degree is more able to learn and retain the complex ideas associated with the modern aircraft systems. "
Is your opinion based on your own experience in the learning curve on a modern airline aircraft? Or can you post some verifiable proof of your opinion?
I do not have anywhere near a college or university formal education, yet I found that learning how to manage the computerized heavy jet systems to be no big deal....the manufacturer and the systems designers have gone out of their way to make them easy to operate...that in the end results in a safer machine / operator interface.
Another suggestion, systems operators which airline pilots are make up about maybe ten percent of pilots that come out of the flying schools. The remaining percentage must have mechanical aircraft handling skills to at least a level that will get the thing from A to B in one piece.
And a degree will not do anything for them.
Cat
Is your opinion based on your own experience in the learning curve on a modern airline aircraft? Or can you post some verifiable proof of your opinion?
I do not have anywhere near a college or university formal education, yet I found that learning how to manage the computerized heavy jet systems to be no big deal....the manufacturer and the systems designers have gone out of their way to make them easy to operate...that in the end results in a safer machine / operator interface.
Another suggestion, systems operators which airline pilots are make up about maybe ten percent of pilots that come out of the flying schools. The remaining percentage must have mechanical aircraft handling skills to at least a level that will get the thing from A to B in one piece.
And a degree will not do anything for them.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
-
Right Seat Captain
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 1237
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:51 pm
- Location: Various/based CYOW
I love how so many people assume that if you have a degree in something, one must not have very good mechanical skills, or vice versa.
I started flying, and became an instructor before I went to University. I don't consider my piloting skills extraordinary or anything, but I don't think they are lacking either. I don't think that by my going to school, my skills have suffered in the least bit.
College teaches someone a skill in something in a particular field, which is good in its own right. University doesn't teach skills. Rather it teaches thought. It teaches someone how to think, how to analyze things, and how to learn. The classes don't teach you everything you need to know. One must go out and learn on their own to be able to pass University.
Whether you're in the Arts, Sciences, Engineering, Business, Law...whatever, everyone is taught methods in thinking and looking at things. That is a valuable thing for a company, since day to day problems always come up, and someone who was taught how to analyze something, may be able to come up with a solution from a different point of view on the matter.
I started flying, and became an instructor before I went to University. I don't consider my piloting skills extraordinary or anything, but I don't think they are lacking either. I don't think that by my going to school, my skills have suffered in the least bit.
College teaches someone a skill in something in a particular field, which is good in its own right. University doesn't teach skills. Rather it teaches thought. It teaches someone how to think, how to analyze things, and how to learn. The classes don't teach you everything you need to know. One must go out and learn on their own to be able to pass University.
Whether you're in the Arts, Sciences, Engineering, Business, Law...whatever, everyone is taught methods in thinking and looking at things. That is a valuable thing for a company, since day to day problems always come up, and someone who was taught how to analyze something, may be able to come up with a solution from a different point of view on the matter.
This is an extremely valid point. Once again bringing to light that a degree, or diploma, or any certification (outside of pilot licences), or the lack there of, does not identify the true capabilities of an individual.LH wrote:... In reality, all it means is that they have passed "the minimum acceptable standards as set down by the government".
Let's not forget that AC needs a way of reducing the number of applicants in order to try and pick 'the best individual for the specific task'. Having a degree, as per their specifications, will help get the interview - it certainly does not guarentee you a job.
I'm sure there are plenty of individuals on this forum that have gone very far in aviation with only a high school certificate. Does that mean they are less deserving of their current position? Hell no! They are where they are based on their skills. Regardless of education background.
The degree/diploma/whatever will certainly help in the initial stages, beyond that, it's up to the individual.
- Isis
Keep Flyin'!
-
monkeyspankmasterflex
- Rank 7
- Posts: 517
- Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 1:12 pm
Over the last 20 yrs degrees have replaced the high school dimploma as the educational norm. Does it make for a more productive workforce? I don't think that's necessarily the case. I've flown with both university grads and highschool grads and have never been able to correlate abilty (hands/feet, decision making, crm, systems knowledge etc...) with education. The only observation that has proven to be true 100% of the time is that I'm better looking than the lot of them.
Anyone who has completed High School, other than those who just scaped through, has acquired the ability to learn, read, listen and be organized about their studies. If they haven't, then if they expect university to teach them what they are missing after all those years, they'd better guess again. In Junior grades the teacher will "ride butts" and send letters home to work with parents on a problem like this. In Junior High they do the same, but start to back-off on that a bit. In High School they are still doing that, but are again starting to back-off a bit more. Once someone gets to university they don't give "a rat's ass" if you even show up in class, aren't "baby-sitters" and if you haven't learned all the above, then "baby" you're on your own and headed for disaster and a lot of wasted money. Just because one has that problem learning does not therefore mean that they are stupid. It means that they may very well be smart, but they have a particular problem in that area the same as someone with dyslexia........and there are many demonstrated intelligent people who have and do suffer from just such a problem. My Degree and my wife's Degree indicate ONLY, that we are of average intelligence and do not suffer from any learning impairment that hampered us from obtaining those degrees. It also indicates that we had an target in mind, the monies to pay for it and the time was found to pursue it. My wife has a Masters in Education and on that subject she knows a great deal........on many other subjects she has had no training and therefore has obtained her knowledge through "life experiences". These are also noted as being extremely valuable by education systems because anyone who obtained their Grade XI many years ago will be considered to have the equal of Grade XII now, obtained through "life experience" and will be considered the equal of a High School graduate. Universities have noted this a long time ago and introduced something called "The Mature Student Program" whereby those who never obtained that Grade XII Diploma may attend classes. After passing that first year, they are considered the equal of any other student attending said university who happened to pass their Grade XII in the so-called "normal" way. I personally know of two people who passed Grade X many years before and years later did this very thing. They both hold more than one Degree at this point in time and one even graduated "Cum Laude".
Points made by both Cat and Isis are also very true. I have no particular problem with any entity asking for Degrees before application is approved because that their business and they do as they want in that regard. WHAT I do disagree with are the reasons given or suggested for that requirement. Entering the RCMP with a Grade XII will have you start as a 3rd Class Constable and the pay to go with. Having a University Degree will have you start as a 1st Class Constable and a higher pay bracket. Having been an RCMP Member eons ago, I can factually state that having that Degree has no bearing whatsoever for at least the first 10 years on whether you are a good policeman or good investigator. For the first 3 years you follow more experienced Members around like a puppy dog, keep your mouth shut and look/learn. I'd very strongly suggest that there is a parallel for those pilots entering the profession, with or without a Degree or any further education beyond High School. I also strongly suggest that those doing that learning realize that it's people such as Cat, who have acquired their own "PhD" in that milieu, have demonstrated their ability to learn therefore and in the world of aviation colleges would be credited with a whole lot more that any Certificate they carry from any formal schooling eons before. AC and their ilk would not suffer one iota in any regard from having someone such as Cat on staff and there'd undoubtedly be a host of their own university-educated FO's and Captains who would find that this "supposedly" lesser-educated person is in fact their equal on all levels except how to do calculus MAYBE. One thing would remain true for both of them though.......they would have demonstrated that they have the ability to learn and absorb and neither one of them acquired that ability at any university......they either had it at birth or acquired it during their formative years. If one is attending university with the intention that it will teach them HOW to learn, then they have left it far too late and better have very deep pockets to pay for tutors because the universities expect that you have acquired that ability or else you wouldn't be stupid enough to waste your monies. Unfortunately, the first year of university is loaded with those that learn this hard lesson the hard way and sometimes on borrowed monies yet. So AC could raise their qualification to a Masters in a particular discipline and would they therefore get a better prospective Captain for years hence?........sorry, but they better no go "joining those two dots" or they would be in for a very huge surprise. They also know that anyway and as syayed before by me, it is a "tool" used to "weed-out" the horrendous pile of applications that they receive. When you get too many in any trade or profession, you "up the ante" because you can do so and when you don't have that pile of applications, you "lower the ante". It's called Economics 100 and known as "The Law of Supply and Demand".
Points made by both Cat and Isis are also very true. I have no particular problem with any entity asking for Degrees before application is approved because that their business and they do as they want in that regard. WHAT I do disagree with are the reasons given or suggested for that requirement. Entering the RCMP with a Grade XII will have you start as a 3rd Class Constable and the pay to go with. Having a University Degree will have you start as a 1st Class Constable and a higher pay bracket. Having been an RCMP Member eons ago, I can factually state that having that Degree has no bearing whatsoever for at least the first 10 years on whether you are a good policeman or good investigator. For the first 3 years you follow more experienced Members around like a puppy dog, keep your mouth shut and look/learn. I'd very strongly suggest that there is a parallel for those pilots entering the profession, with or without a Degree or any further education beyond High School. I also strongly suggest that those doing that learning realize that it's people such as Cat, who have acquired their own "PhD" in that milieu, have demonstrated their ability to learn therefore and in the world of aviation colleges would be credited with a whole lot more that any Certificate they carry from any formal schooling eons before. AC and their ilk would not suffer one iota in any regard from having someone such as Cat on staff and there'd undoubtedly be a host of their own university-educated FO's and Captains who would find that this "supposedly" lesser-educated person is in fact their equal on all levels except how to do calculus MAYBE. One thing would remain true for both of them though.......they would have demonstrated that they have the ability to learn and absorb and neither one of them acquired that ability at any university......they either had it at birth or acquired it during their formative years. If one is attending university with the intention that it will teach them HOW to learn, then they have left it far too late and better have very deep pockets to pay for tutors because the universities expect that you have acquired that ability or else you wouldn't be stupid enough to waste your monies. Unfortunately, the first year of university is loaded with those that learn this hard lesson the hard way and sometimes on borrowed monies yet. So AC could raise their qualification to a Masters in a particular discipline and would they therefore get a better prospective Captain for years hence?........sorry, but they better no go "joining those two dots" or they would be in for a very huge surprise. They also know that anyway and as syayed before by me, it is a "tool" used to "weed-out" the horrendous pile of applications that they receive. When you get too many in any trade or profession, you "up the ante" because you can do so and when you don't have that pile of applications, you "lower the ante". It's called Economics 100 and known as "The Law of Supply and Demand".
-
. ._
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7374
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 5:50 pm
- Location: Cowering in my little room because the Water Cooler is locked.
- Contact:
I'm not a theory expert.Cat Driver wrote:" The stereotype for Ontario grads (or any other type of pilot group) exists because people such as yourself promote it. "
From my experience with college grads in general far too many are experts in theory and hamhanded in piloting skills.
Cat
The Soon to Graduate,
-istp
-
justplanecrazy
- Rank 8
- Posts: 815
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 1:57 pm
O.k. hears the deal. AC is not hiring people for their stick and rudder skills, they are not flying puddle jumpers. What they are doing is hiring people who will then have to go through strenuous complex ground school training regarding complex aircraft systems etc.
A good Airbus pilot is not one that can fly a perfect approach, hell most of them don't even fly the approach. What makes a good pilot is one with the neccessary stick and rudder skills and the ability to learn and retain info regarding many complex sytems operating within the aircraft.
This is a classroom style type of learning. If someone applies who has a B.A. and someone else applies with no B.A, well the B.A. shows that this individual has already proven him/herself as capable classroom student. So why gamble on this accomplished pilot with no B.A. when you might quickly find out that he can't learn a bloody thing with a pencil and paper. The guy with the B.A. is simply that... less risky.
A good Airbus pilot is not one that can fly a perfect approach, hell most of them don't even fly the approach. What makes a good pilot is one with the neccessary stick and rudder skills and the ability to learn and retain info regarding many complex sytems operating within the aircraft.
This is a classroom style type of learning. If someone applies who has a B.A. and someone else applies with no B.A, well the B.A. shows that this individual has already proven him/herself as capable classroom student. So why gamble on this accomplished pilot with no B.A. when you might quickly find out that he can't learn a bloody thing with a pencil and paper. The guy with the B.A. is simply that... less risky.
We have no effective screening methods to make sure pilots are sane.
— Dr. Herbert Haynes, Federal Aviation Authority.
— Dr. Herbert Haynes, Federal Aviation Authority.
Agreed.
However, it seems to me that there is an understanding that a person who holds a college diploma is less capable of learning/studying, than someone with a university degree. ie that a college graduate is less intelligent than a university graduate.
Since that is not the case (from my own personal experience), I wonder if AC uses a point system.
Can anyone verify that for me?
- Isis
However, it seems to me that there is an understanding that a person who holds a college diploma is less capable of learning/studying, than someone with a university degree. ie that a college graduate is less intelligent than a university graduate.
Since that is not the case (from my own personal experience), I wonder if AC uses a point system.
Can anyone verify that for me?
- Isis
Keep Flyin'!
-
just curious
- Rank Moderator
- Posts: 3592
- Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:29 am
- Location: The Frozen North
- Contact:
Therein lies the fallacy and where generalizations are dangerous. Do not assume that because someone has passed a course in University, College, trade school or flying course, that they automatically have the ability to learn and retain. There are pilots out there who have passed their Commercial License, but do not have the ability to learn and fly anything beyond a certain size and complexity. They are in their niche and should remain there. There are people who have passed all exams to obtain a BA from some university, BUT only after many years and a multitude of class failures. They stuck to it and finally got it, but their learning ability is not on a par with someone with a 3.9 GPA and got theirs first crack.....and many will admit that and realize that they are going no farther with their given abilities. They do though, now have one of the qualifications for applying to AC and a host of American airlines.
If someone has demonstrated through their excellent course marks and have a Grade XII Diploma, then they have also demonstrated that they have the tools to learn. Many can demonstrate their ability to use Trigonometry, Geometry and and a good background in the grasping of Chemistry and/or Physics. These people have demonstrated that they have a lesser ability to learn?......I hardly think so.
I attended university later in life than most and with much more "life experience". The one item that abounded in the halls of my academia was what I call "a subtle arrogance", that in someway those not in those halls of learning were somehow not equal in some way. It was never spoken, but the veiled suggestions during conversations was abundant. I approve most definitely of a person advancing their knowledge and education if they so desire. I also acknowledge that if someone wishes to practice Law or build bridges and buildings, that they will have to have and must have an Engineering Degree. I DO NOT however believe that a person must have a University Degree to be a pilot or study and learn the systems within them. If however, that pilot wishes to be a Test Pilot for the military or Bombardier for example, then I believe that it is paramount that they have an Engineering or Science Degree of some kind......and I believe that one will find that most do and that that has been like that since the early years of aviation. As stated before me, university graduation MAY attest to a person's learning and retention ability, but it should nevr be a an automatic assumption. It should also not be an automatic assumption that the 1st rate graduate of Grade XII DOES NOT have that same ability to learn and retain. Do that and you pass over and flush down the toilet many "gems".
If someone has demonstrated through their excellent course marks and have a Grade XII Diploma, then they have also demonstrated that they have the tools to learn. Many can demonstrate their ability to use Trigonometry, Geometry and and a good background in the grasping of Chemistry and/or Physics. These people have demonstrated that they have a lesser ability to learn?......I hardly think so.
I attended university later in life than most and with much more "life experience". The one item that abounded in the halls of my academia was what I call "a subtle arrogance", that in someway those not in those halls of learning were somehow not equal in some way. It was never spoken, but the veiled suggestions during conversations was abundant. I approve most definitely of a person advancing their knowledge and education if they so desire. I also acknowledge that if someone wishes to practice Law or build bridges and buildings, that they will have to have and must have an Engineering Degree. I DO NOT however believe that a person must have a University Degree to be a pilot or study and learn the systems within them. If however, that pilot wishes to be a Test Pilot for the military or Bombardier for example, then I believe that it is paramount that they have an Engineering or Science Degree of some kind......and I believe that one will find that most do and that that has been like that since the early years of aviation. As stated before me, university graduation MAY attest to a person's learning and retention ability, but it should nevr be a an automatic assumption. It should also not be an automatic assumption that the 1st rate graduate of Grade XII DOES NOT have that same ability to learn and retain. Do that and you pass over and flush down the toilet many "gems".
-
justplanecrazy
- Rank 8
- Posts: 815
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 1:57 pm
Not seeing the point here. You have two people on an equal playing field both have proven they have the ability to learn in a number of ways. The only difference is one has proven it in a classroom UNI setting similar to an AC groundschool. Why would you not consider him to be less risky than someone who did well way back in highschool but didn't display the drive or determination or whatever to learn at a higher level. Even if they failed tons of classes they still made it through and learned it in the end... hence less risky.LH wrote: There are people who have passed all exams to obtain a BA from some university, BUT only after many years and a multitude of class failures. They stuck to it and finally got it, but their learning ability is not on a par with someone with a 3.9 GPA and got theirs first crack.....and many will admit that and realize that they are going no farther with their given abilities. They do though, now have one of the qualifications for applying to AC and a host of American airlines.
It's not a requirement for WJA or AC where they are saying you need a degree in order to fly for us, its simply added points. What we should really be arguing here is why the hell another langauge adds points to your resume' not a demonstarted learning ability.
We have no effective screening methods to make sure pilots are sane.
— Dr. Herbert Haynes, Federal Aviation Authority.
— Dr. Herbert Haynes, Federal Aviation Authority.
