Not suggesting that A 90day CFI is better Than a 20year CFI! I'm saying that there may be some cases that a 90Day CFI can understand why a student is struggling because he/she just went through the same thing 90days ago. Thus better able to help that student. While a 20year CFI can't figure out why it's so hard for them. Well maybe it's been 20years since they did it and they don't remember how hard it was for them? I'm just trying to not be closed minded about the situation.

Can you define Learning??
Can you List the 6 Principles of Learing?
Can you List the 4 Levels of Learing?
Can you give me the 3 reasons why U forget?

I grantee anyone of those 90day CFIs at ATP could. Why They just took the Written 10days AGO :D:D

Can you list the 4 levels of learning? Everything you listed is ROTE memorization. Can a 90 day CFI APPLY and CORRELATE that knowledge to teaching a student? NO! It takes experience teaching different kinds of people to be able to teach many people effectively. I have been teaching for about a year now and can tell you that my teching style has changed drastically and I teach more effectively because it is easier to read students and how well they understand the concepts you are trying to convey. This sir only comes from the experience of actually getting your hands dirty. Just because you have a wet CFI certificate doesn't mean you can teach... It just means you met PTS standards for the checkride that day.

Can a 90 day CFI APPLY and CORRELATE that knowledge to teaching a student? NO!

How do you know that?..... What you just said was personal! There are a lot of I's in your post. You were referring to yourself right?
You have no clue what the next person will or is able to do. How can you justify everyone's else abilities on your abilities?

and ROTE is only 1 of the 4 Levels of Learning you got 3 more to go.

And an example of ROTE "for the old school guys" would be a student flying at Vx without knowing why.

You gotta be kidding me...

So being able to quote FOI drivel is what makes an ATP 90 day wonder a competent CFI, though he was a PPL 90 days ago?

I'm less and less impressed the further this thread goes.

There is no substitute for experience and 90 day wonders, who have never left the academy bubble, have seen precious little of the real world.

The difference between the 20 year CFI and the 90 day CFI is he could look up the 4 levels of learning in a book if you asked him about it. The 90 day wonder, though, can't "look up" hours and hours of experience doing the job.

Keiundraj,
Let me be clear, there is a significant difference I was hoping for you to understand: 1. One can be trained how to safely operate an aircraft in a very controlled environment. 2. Can the student use their experience and maturity to operate in the real world of business flying an aircraft safely.

Back to 1. All training programs are theoretically designed to be safe, repetitive, and produce defined minimum results in a minimum amount of time (Costs). ATP, Flightsafety, Parks, UND, ERAU, etc, and all highly rated programs, teach monkey skills well. But they don't pass along much else in a programmed experiential fashion. You may get some, but it is ad hoc.

2. What TwotterDriver is discussing is the other half of the equation: These experiences are mentored (like TwotterDrivers post). A well trained, experienced and mature Capt.
The friction points of the real world outside are your reality, not the protective and highly regulated training program. Two pilots know how to safely operate an aircraft (eg the EMB-120). They have different experience levels. In the same set of circumstances, one may choose not to operate for safety reasons. The other one operates and lands safely. Perhaps luck,
Are they the same? No, they are not. The first may have learned to assess the risk factor, done in many airlines, corporate, and military ops and wisely chose not to operate despite extreme pressure to go, sometimes at the cost of their job. But they are alive and so are the customers who could care less because they don't realize this professional kept them from harm. What he/she is paid to do. A difficult call. The second pilot may be well trained, just didn't have the experience or knowledge to not operate. Likely, they learned alot and will use that in the future to operate more safely and in their revised risk assesment analysis. Unfortunately, sometimes an accident occurs, and the NTSB lays fault on some element. Inexperience or complacency are causes.
My own admission. In the past, I have have been the second pilot far to many times, not out of stupidity, but lack of experience. Fortunately, good training saved the day, but also a measure of luck. As time goes along, and the hours build up (which only measures the opportunity to gain experience) one becomes more like the TwotterDriver, and learns how to deal with the "non flying" pressures to fly safely. I enjoy learning from these pilots, they share and mentor from their experience, Great leveraging of aviation talent. The argument is that 300+ hour CFI's teaching other PPL students do not have this experience in the business aviation side of the coin, they may be excellent at teaching the curriculum though (as they should) but that is all. (The military equivalent is the USAF First Assignment IP and the Navy's Selectively Retained Graduate, pilot graduates who immediately instruct new students like ATP's etc. ) The difference is: The military only allows a few of these well trained folks to remain to teach, if any at all, the military still invests in the fleet experienced pilots who have "been there, done that" to pass along the stuff TwotterDriver was doing.
Example that applies: A good CFI/IP can teach anyone monkey skills, "Rote". A very necessary learning skill. I can teach anyone how to land on the back of an aircraft carrier, only catch is you would have to have to want to do this. Let me continue with this example. To do this, we do carrier style landings for a year in virtually all other training. In the carrier qualification phase, the student does nothing else but field carrier landings (T&G's) once or twice per day for a week with specific briefs to prepare them for their solo trip to the boat.
The requirements to let the student land at the ship is very closely controlled and restrictive, weather, sea state, distance from shore, etc. etc is controlled to ensure maximum safety for the inexperienced getting initial experience. Additionally, very experienced fleet pilots make the go-no go decisions and lead the formation of students to the boat, all we want the student to do is land on the ship. Don't need to navigate the way out, figure out how to get into the pattern with other aircraft, etc. All they have to do is stay on my wing. I will drop them off, all they need to do is turn into the pattern and get picked up by another special instructor, the landing signal officer. Everyone is watching the student through the whole process. Fast forward a year later after they are checked out in the Fleet and deployed. All bets are off, you operate in an environment that is 'operational', not a closely regulated training environment. The intent is that the individual is using their experience from the training environments (mind you same ships, etc) with alot less control. Hope this helps.

Judging from my personal experience and that of every other CFI I know, you may think when you walk out that day with your shiny new CFI certificate that you did it. You are now a full-fledged instructor. NEGATIVE. You just have an instructor certificate.

I don't think I really got the "hang" of teaching the fundamentals of flight until about my 400th hour of dual given. And I don't mean I didn't know how to tell them to keep the wings level, I just mean that I didn't know how to tell when they truly had basic attitude control down well enough to move them on to other things. Flying an airplane is an extremely complicated task, and teaching someone how to do it is even more complicated. There are SO many little quirks about individual people, especially when you stick them in a little aluminum tube and make them do tricks 3,000 feet in the air. No book, no class, no mnemonic can teach you about that. You just have to go do it over and over and over again with different people from different backgrounds and education levels, and then maybe you can start calling yourself an instructor.

I think I might have been an instructor with another 500 hours of dual given, but I'm off to drive the bus now.

Did you miss the fact that you quoted two of the other levels from my post? So I got 3 of them and I know the 4th... understanding... What you are failing to understand is the point that we are all trying to make here. Just because you have a CFI certificate doesn't mean you can teach! Nothing can be substituted for experience. Get some experience teaching and get a few 8710's pushed through on the first attempt and then you can start calling yourself and instructor. Like I said just because you have the certificate doesn't mean you can teach, it just means you met the PTS standards that day.

Ok guys..... You all are saying that because that People just got their CFI license that they're in capable of instructing. I'm not disagreeing that an experienced CFI would be able to teach better. What I'm saying is that because he/she just got the CFI they're doing their student a dis justice.(Gotta start somewhere?) There's CFIs here at ATP that's been here 6months and have probably seen more Students and problems they're having that some CFIs with 2years of exprience. Due to the fact that there's new students starting Every Monday. I'm not trying to step on anyone's toes. I know I'm new on this side of the industry. I just don't get why people are so Hard on ATP here. I was at a Part 141 University before I came here. We'd set in the classroom for 3hrs 5days a week and probably flew 2hrs a week.... For me that type of learning didn't work. I learned here better sit in the classroom for 4hrs Fly for 2hrs. Do and discuss everything you just talked about in the classroom in the airplane! Not sure why there's such a vendetta against ATP their students, grads, and now their Instructors. Now by all means ATP isn't perfect, But it works, and i think that one needs to find out why it works instead of bashing EVERYTHING ABOUT IT!