CFI-to-CFI Newsletter - Volume 3, Issue 2 - 2

CFI to CFI

gA safety is my responsibility
thEsE dAys, “ownership” is a common buzzword in the corporate world. It’s meant to express a certain sense of personal pride and accountability that separates good employees from those who are just going through the motions. It’s a concept that also has a place in families, schools, and— you guessed it—even GA safety. Recently a pilot emailed me feedback about an ASI safety seminar he’d attended, and I decided to continue our dialog over the phone. As we shared ideas about the seminar and other GA safety issues, he mentioned that he’d almost invited one of his pilot buddies to the seminar because “He really needs to hear what you’re saying.” This piqued

my interest, so I asked why. “Well…he’s dangerous—does low passes over the airport, flies VFR into IMC…” My initial reaction was simply to agree that the situation sounded like an accident waiting to happen—but then I decided to ask a question: “So, what have you done about it?” There was silence on the line. “What do you mean?” the pilot finally replied. “Have you ever talked to him about the situation?” I asked. “Uh…no,” he said. “Well,” I replied, “if he’s a friend and you’re concerned for his safety (and that of others), it might be a good idea.” Over the years, GA pilots have been inundated with safety information and resources, so I suppose it’s easy to rationalize leaving the responsibility to those who’ve already taken up the mantle (ASI, FAA,

flight schools, etc.). But, while the GA industry’s collective efforts have contributed to lowering the accident rate, getting it down further, in my opinion, requires an approach at the micro level—the level of “my responsibility.” What do you think? Is this a direction we should go, or are we asking for trouble by trying to be our “brothers’ keeper”? How can our actions influence others and our individual efforts improve GA safety? Share your thoughts by clicking on the “Leave a Comment” tab at the bottom of the digital edition or email cfinewsletter@aopa.org.

Paul Deres Director of Education, Air Safety Institute

you can more easily repackage that knowledge and use it to guide and develop your students’ behavior in a meaningful and efficient way. The first step in modeling the master’s behavior is known as skill disassembly. This is where you disassemble the subjective experience of any skill or behavior—motor, perceptual, or cognitive—into teachable components. You have to take it apart before you can depart. You can elicit these components either through careful self-observation (if you're the model) or

kinesthetic (feeling) senses, we can define our subjective experience in these terms. If we further divide these three senses into subcategories, we have a rich vocabulary for defining the individual components making up almost all human behavior. Here are the specific sensory definitions I use in this process: The visual (V) sense has four categories: Vi—visual internal: the image we see in the mind's eye; Ve—visual external: the image we see with our eyes; Vc—visual constructed: the image we construct with our imagination; Vr—vibehaviOral mOdeling is sual recalled: the image we accOmPlished by clOsely remember from memory. examining and dissecting (Note: Vi is a separate catethe subjective exPerience Of gory from Vc and Vr because the master whO POssesses it's possible to have a visual the skill tO be learned. internal image that's neither constructed nor recalled through well-crafted questions (if you're from long-term memory. For example, using someone else as the model). Or, for close your eyes and imagine the last word a peak experience, ask yourself the wellin this paragraph.) crafted questions. Our audio (A) sense has six categoOf course, when we speak of skills in ries: Ai—audio internal: the sounds terms of their components, we need an we hear in the mind's ear; Ae—audio entirely new vocabulary to reference the external: the sounds we hear with our individual parts of our (or someone else’s) ears; Ac—audio constructed: the sounds experience. Since experience is primarily we construct with our imagination; Ar— acquired through visual, auditory, and audio recalled: the sounds we remember;

Aid—audio internal dialogue; Aed—audio external dialogue. Finally, our kinesthetic (K) sense has four categories: Ki—kinesthetic internal: a feeling we have about something; Ke— kinesthetic external: something we actually feel; Kc—kinesthetic constructed: a feeling we construct from imagination; Kr—kinesthetic recalled: a feeling we remember. Let’s use these definitions to model the behavior known as making coordinated turn entries. I'll act as the model, since I can provide an accurate sensory description of my turning behavior (but I'm not going to wear makeup, and that's final!). The process begins by examining a specific behavior or skill and breaking it down (disassembling it) into sensory components. That’s right. I must dissect my behavior in terms of these sensory definitions. This is not necessarily easy, since mastering a behavior pretty much consists of performing it as a reflex or habit (known as reflexive habituation). For me, the skill of entering a turn is not something I have to think about. Nevertheless, with the previous sensory definitions in hand, and with a little introspection, I can disassemble every reflexive or habitual behavior into its component parts and transfer them to a student.

2 | www.airsafetyinstitute.org

http://www.airsafetyinstitute.org

CFI-to-CFI Newsletter - Volume 3, Issue 2

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of CFI-to-CFI Newsletter - Volume 3, Issue 2