November Seven

I'm a Visual/Kinesthetic split. Do you know what that means relative to how I learn best? In the model for instruction you just posted, my brain would get jammed much like electronic countermeasures warfare. My learning would be de-optimized and the information coming from the Instructor would not seat correctly inside my brain. He/She would eventually get frustrated with mu increasingly detailed questions about things he/she has already covered and I would sense that frustration and back-off from asking the very questions I would need to continue my training. See where this is headed?

This is a branch of the Neurosciences. Ask a V/K split, my brain works optimally for recall when the initial input is Visual (first) followed up immediately with a Kinesthetic (second) input and then rounded off with an Audible (third) input. In that sequence, is my sweet spot for learning new subject matter - no matter the subject, or the matter. I earned my PhD this way.

I need an Instructor who can understand this and use the communications channels that are best suited to establishing rapid total recall in my brain. I can explain this to an Instructor in about 15 minutes. They can then decide whether or not they can communicate in such a manner.

If the Instructor tries to (first) "Tell" me something, then they are sending the first input through my Auditory Channel and that literally guarantees that I'm already at a disadvantage for learning what's they are attempting to communicate. This is backwards for me and its like sending a jamming signal to a box with a transceiver. Not optimal. When I got to the "Student Tells" phase of the learning cycle, my reply would be so screwed up and so muted, that the Instructor would no doubt feel as though they are "not getting through to me." This cycle of abusing and wasting time would continue until one of us threw in the towel.

Often times, people do not know or understand why they are learning something so slowly. This is precisely why. They are either jamming themselves and don't know it, or they are being jammed by an Educator and are unaware of how or why its happening because both Educator and Student are completely clueless about how their brains have been wired for optimal communications. This is a direct function of Early Childhood Development and a myriad of different environmental inputs that shaped the brain for filtering the world around it.

I'm trying to avoid being jammed by my Flight Instructor who does not understand why or how they are jamming me.

- First: Show me (Visual Cortex)
- Second: Involve me physically (Kinesthetic - Neurons and Motor Neurons)
- Third: Tell me about it (Auditory Cortex - Reinforces 1st & 2nd inputs)

In this mode, I can learn anything - rapidly, securely and with maximal total recall on the fly - day or night. I could not forget things learned in this way even if I wanted to. This is how my brain is wired. I need an Instructor who can understand this and map to it. I would become a competent pilot and the instructor would be a brilliant teacher.


The very first (and last) Instructor I flew with who taught Pitch-Power-Trim, Roll-Power-Trim, Slow Flight, Stalls and Spins in slightly over an hour, also touched the controls. However, he always warned me that he was about to do and always told me why he was doing it and what he wanted me to correct as a result of doing it.


I know how my brain works and have taken time to study the neuroscience that governs learning. So, I know the communications channels best suited for me to absorb new a subjects optimally. There would be no need for middle ground, if I had an Instructor who understood this - as there would never be any push-back from me. The reason is because, I'd be too engaged in optimal learning of everything my Instructor was teaching - as opposed to having to rationalize everything being communicated through the wrong channels, because my brain was being jammed without the Instructor knowing that they are doing it.


Experience is internalized and referenced internally. Knowledge Transfer is a completely different subject. I'm referring to the way in which an Instructor communicates to their Student and the neuroscience behind it. If both parties understood that, the instruction would flow a billion times more smoothly.

No doubt the Instructor has Students where he feels they learned very quickly and with minimal retracement of subject matter. In that case, the Instructor landed a Student whose dominant neurological processors where stacked in same order as the Instructor was delivering instruction. Then the Instructor lands Students who seem to need special hand-holding, a high number or repetitions and large doses of subject matter retracement on a regular basis. That's because the Instructor landed a Student whose dominant processing filters were not in alignment with the Instructors mode of communication.

If this were implemented correctly in our public school systems throughout the country, we'd be ranked Number #1 in every subject matter across the board world wide. Today, our public school systems are a mess. Not because the Students have a hard time finding middle ground, but because The System does not take into consideration the neuroscience that creates Visual, Auditory and Kinesthetic neural network paths in the brain as a direct result of early childhood development and other environmental factors.

You can take an Auditory and try to "Show Him" something until you turn blue in the face. You will then declare that because he still has questions, or because his questions take on a certain form or shape, that he's having a hard time finding middle ground with your ideas. Wrong. Dead wrong. That person is not trying to intentionally fight with you. That person is being jammed at the neurological level by the one equally trying hard to instruct them correctly. They are both trying hard. They just don't understand the neurological disconnect that keeps them from communicating at an optimal level - at all times during the instruction phase.

Like I said, if I wanted to jam you intentionally to obtain an upper hand in some ulterior motive I might have, I know exactly how to do that because I can detect your dominant filters in a matter of seconds after meeting you. I can start jamming you from the word go and you'd never know the difference until it was too late and you signed a contract that was not optimal for you. You would later find that out, but it would be too late then. I do not do this because I find it highly unethical and even immoral. But, I'm explaining this to you because it is a central part behind why some Students have difficulty in our mostly Auditory driven educational systems here in the US. There are a lot of Kinesthetics and Visuals out there who suffer because of it.

- Show me
- Involve me
- Then tell me the reason behind it

- Visual
- Kinesthetic
- Auditory

In that order. The order is vitally important. There would be no need to seek middle ground. I would simply absorb what you have to teach like a sponge. You would think I was your absolute best student, ever. You'd be saying to your other CFI friends: "Wow! This guy gets it quickly. I never have to continually repeat myself with this guy. I go through it one time with him and boom, he picks it up. Best student I've ever had, hands down."

Show. Involve. Explain later. What do most programs do?

- Explain, first
- Show, second
- Involve, dead last

That's not how my brain works. And, yes. I would be going through a lot of unnecessary internal interpolation and transformation of ideas, concepts and information, for the sole purpose of making internal reformulations of what you just instructed, so that the information sequences as: Visual/ Kinesthetic/Auditory in my head. That internal transformation at the neurological level takes time and energy. Only those who are aware of it, can make the internal transformation more efficient - so they get by. However, it will never be optimal for them.

They would have to rewire their entire brain, just to conform to the Instructor's communication mode. Now, you tell me which one is easier. Having the Instructor map communications to the Students dominant processing filters. Or, having the Student completely or partially rewire their brain?


The goal is to create a Structured and Flexible program that integrates Training with Time Building for a specific aircraft Type & Category. The opposite would be winging it and generalizing both processes while hoping for optimal results. The underlying goal my be fixed and rigid. But, I'm wide open and flexible with the internal paths taken to reach that fixed goal. I simply need an Instructor who understands this and able/willing to map their communication and teaching modes to my dominant processing filters - once they become aware of them and why they are important long term.

Recall, my target goal is consistent and reliable competence as VLJ single pilot starting from zero. I'm not interested in sounding off about a rating or two as a cocktail party conversation piece. I'm interested in safety, skill, knowledge, expertise and relevant experience leading to reliable IFR/IMC competence day or night, rain or shine. Developing solid decision making ability and solid corrective skills upon detection of error - any time and any where. A good, solid, competent problem solver if/when the time comes. That's all. Nothing more than that. Juts a rock solid Aviator.