JamesNoBrakes

Benefits of the bigger schools include standardized training, more consistent training, usually more professional training, usually faster pace, usually harder "groundschools" that are more beneficial when you move to a professional flight department of any kind (airline, cargo, corporate, etc). Negatives include the fast learning rate, because you tend to not really retain much of the material and sometimes never really learn or understand certain maneuvers and topics, you just train hard enough to pass the checkride. It's not necessarily that it's a "sanitized environment" where nothing out of the ordinary happens, but due to the fast pace and limited experience you sometimes never experience much that is "out of the ordinary". Many times these flight schools hire their own, and you get assigned an instructor that just got their certificate a few months or weeks back. This is a case of the blind-leading-the-blind often. I've seen a couple that were excellent, but the schools that really enforce the quality don't get the best reputation for cost and quickness. Sometimes the check instructors or examiners don't really enforce the standards, and you end up passing and not really benefiting from the training.

Benefits of the smaller schools include more personal training, possibly better experience with the flight instructors, as they are more "long-term" and not just trying to build hours to go fly an airliner, sometimes the benefit is in dealing with more real-world equipment failures and decision making situations, but sometimes it's just downright dangerous and there's no good excuse for some of the stuff they do or that you get put into. You might be able to mitigate cost more here by "stretching out" training, but in the end this usually ends up costing you more, it's just more spread out is the thing. As far as other negatives, sometimes the smaller school includes the "reject instructors" from the big school. he drop-out rate in professional flight department ground schools can be much higher, although you might have better flying skills. The learning pace is slower and You often get the same issue of the designated examiners not really enforcing the standards at times. The instructors may not be as up to date on recent regulatory, training, and industry trends/rules.

If I had to do my training again, I'd probably do it the same way (big university, not "accelerated"). It comes down to the individual, but too many people expect to be spoon-fed information and that somehow their presence will impart the necessary understanding and knowledge. I had plenty of experience with actual instrument conditions, decisions with faulty equipment, and a pretty good understanding of most maneuvers and aerodynamics. If you aren't getting what you want, you have to do something about it. You have to see the chief pilot or someone higher. If they treat you like crap, you need to find a different school, but you also have to sit and think about what they tell you. Are they doing it for your benefit because they really want you to be successful? Or are they doing it because they want your money? All of them are businesses, but some actually want to do well, despite what you hear on these boards.

It's hard to make overall rules. Many of these are not consistent. It comes down to the student. At part 61, they are often self-motivated. At 141, they are often there because mommy and daddy are paying for flight training, and they are not quite sure if they even want to be a pilot (later on, they might blame the school for taking their money, but it's not the schools fault for trying to train someone). This might make it "appear" that a part 61 is better because the students are happier, but it's apples to oranges. Often times students in part 141 do not know how good they have it in terms of standardization, until they go fly part 61 and come back horrified at the lack in standardization and standard practices by instructors (leaving the student guessing as to what is the correct course of action or procedure with a particular instructor).