Indeed. Now a) you can look like all your students pass on the first try and b) Now still make money with the remedial training. Imagine you're the owner, and PE. You have an incentive to make students pass, but perhaps you still want to bilk them for more training. Now you don't have to put messy fails on the record and do retests yourself, now you can put all them instructors to work fixing the mistake. I would be willing to bet that a lot of the remedial training would also sneak into the initial hours towards getting those instructors started on their instructors....digits_ wrote: ↑Thu Oct 27, 2022 2:10 pmOh it can be both. You just need a bit of creativity. 'We'll milk them for whatever we can with inferior instruction, but in the end they NEED to pass!'photofly wrote: ↑Thu Oct 27, 2022 2:00 pmOne cannot simultaneously believe that in-house examiners are giving students an easy pass, and at the same time...Squaretail wrote: ↑Thu Oct 27, 2022 1:29 pm
I'm sure that the fact that many schools use an in house PE has nothing to do with this.... be looking for excuses to extend training duration artificially.Squaretail wrote: ↑Wed Oct 26, 2022 10:24 am Playing the devil's advocate, this sort of stinks of perhaps some schools looking to soak students for a bit more training.
It really has to be one sort of malfeasance or the other. You pick!
Personally I can see how this could be abused. In a lot of ways. Maybe this is a ticket out for a lot of examiners who don't like failing students, now its not on their heads, it will get fixed right? Its not a constructive fix, but there's a lot of ways for it to turn bad.