University Degrees

[mattedfred]

The following is only my opinion and is only based on my experience.

I feel that the creation of more and more different paths to take in order to obtain a CPL causes the cost to increase. I feel that it also affects the hiring requirements of many companies. Was the the Aviation Diploma created due to industry demand or do some in the industry now demand one because they exist? I believe that the only University level Aviation Degrees that existed when I went to College were offered by Trinity Western, RMC and Royal Rhodes (sp?). Has the increased number of Aviation Degrees come out of industry demand or do some in the industry now demand one because they exist? Will the existence of Aviation Degrees cause pilot compensation to rise or will it simply increase the cost of obtaining a CPL? Will we one day see companies paying pilots based on their level of post secondary education as well as their flying experience? Will a pilot whom obtained his CPL at his hometown flying club or in his own aircraft or even at an Aviation College be at a clear disadvantage when he applies for a flying job?

This is a chicken and egg scenario. By demand I mean that they look better on a resume. I guess what I'm trying to ask is whether the existence of Aviation Degrees is beneficial or detrimental to the industry?

[deflux]

Yeah i'm not sure what to believe anymore.

I didn't go the aviation college/university route for many reasons and instead i'm at a local FTU. I have a great instructor with 40+ years of real world experience and I think I learn things from him that I could not have learned from a rookie instructor at an aviation college. I am in no way knocking the aviation colleges but I think it would possibly be bad for the industry if aviation degrees took priority over everything else when selecting pilots...

[iflyforpie]

Yeah i'm not sure what to believe anymore.

I didn't go the aviation college/university route for many reasons and instead i'm at a local FTU. I have a great instructor with 40+ years of real world experience and I think I learn things from him that I could not have learned from a rookie instructor at an aviation college. I am in no way knocking the aviation colleges but I think it would possibly be bad for the industry if aviation degrees took priority over everything else when selecting pilots...

+1. What I don't get is what does an aviation 'diploma' do for you in the physical and mental sense for the extra 30 or so thousand dollars? Are they actually regulated by the industry or just a beefed up CPL with a bunch of random extra knowledge thrown in? I was far more impressed with my 'mom and pop' CPL training at the local FTU than the McPPL I got at an aviation college.

[mcconnell14]

When i called the program coordinator at Algonquin college we got talking and he was telling me about this guy that graduated from there years and years ago, hes now flying as a captain for AC, well he told me this guy has 3 kids, 2 sons and 1 daughter. He said all three of his children have grades in the 80's and 90's yet hes not enrolling them into a universty to take flight training such as seneca.He wants them in the Algonquins Diploma program. because he knows that the hiring standard is hardly based on education at all...your gonna be hired in the interview, the way you present yourself, your experiance ETC.... aviation is a weriod industry.

this isnt to say that in the future a uni degree wont be worth alot more in the near future, but my 2 cents are NO...the standard hasnt really changed in how many years? but then again you see the education that Captain Sully had who safetly laned his glinder in the hudson river....MAJOR airline companies might start uping the ante to get more people who are better educated, rather than people are just putting up some hours in a plane, and hope to work with a major airline someday.

[C-FKLY]

I don't know -- part of the reason I'll be going to university is so that I can have a backup plan should this industry tank (again). Part of why is also so I can show that I have dedication and knowledge in other fields, and I can present myself as more than 'just a pilot.' An aviation diploma offers neither of these, so there's 2 solid arguments as to why an aviation diploma isn't right for me. Not to mention that avoiding the college has given me a huge head start -- if things keep going at this rate, I'll have a CPL by the time I graduate high school.

What I see that's wrong with it, is that it's a whole lot more time and money, for not much more bang. Sure, a few more MET classes certainly no doubt will give you a more thorough understanding of weather, but, honestly, isn't the real learning in aviation out there, in the planes and in the skies? Yet, these graduates are coming out with little more than a MIFR/CPL and 300 hours. So, is the better pilot really being made out of a few more physics classes? I doubt it...

[brokenwing]

Instead of spending 60+k on a university degree, why not spend 4 years doing an apprecticeship leading to a licensed tradesman? instead of spending 60k you could be making that per year at the end of the 4 years and will always have something in high demand, and possibly be able to do part time work on the side should you find you have lots of extra time later on in your flying career?

I know if I could do it all over I would be a tradesmen/pilot in a heartbeat.

[mcconnell14]

Instead of spending 60+k on a university degree, why not spend 4 years doing an apprecticeship leading to a licensed tradesman? instead of spending 60k you could be making that per year at the end of the 4 years and will always have something in high demand, and possibly be able to do part time work on the side should you find you have lots of extra time later on in your flying career?

I know if I could do it all over I would be a tradesmen/pilot in a heartbeat.

BANG ON...trades people will always be needed, but still this generation still beleives the trades people are what poor people do or the less rich people.. or atleast it has that sterotype.
after 4 years of university..plus a few years wasted doing shitty aviation jobs for min. wage. say 10 years down the road..your in your 30's. what are you goin to university for? every industry has a starting point...you will start all over with shitty pay days. i bet you reserch other career many many start a low paying even univeristy ones.

IM not in any way saying university is a bad way to go, I just beleive that you should goto UNiversity because you want to learn more indeapth about weather and all those things nothing wrong with that...but if your going to University for a backup plan..then i don't like that idea. If your dream is being a pilot then don't worry about the economy and such...cuz i bet your backup plan will be affected as well then theres go you 60+ k

[MG_]

.

[dt1019]

I'm in a university aviation program myself and I do agree that it is a more expensive option. I still chose the university+aviation path because I wanted to fly and my family (including myself) thinks I should get a degree. Now I wouldn't say university education is useless if all you want to do is be a pilot. Let me give an example. I have a friend who graduated with an engineering degree but he tells me he never really apply what he learned in university at his job. He told me the main purpose of a university education isn't mainly to obtain the knowledge or learn the skills needed for a job, but to improve your critical thinking, problem solving, teamwork, etc...skills. For those who believe this, university education can help you think differently. So I'm sure there's definitely something out of the 4 years of university that can be useful and applicable to a pilot right? Now ofourse, experience matters just as much if not more (definitely not any less I would say!).

Whether the increasing number of college diploma and university aviation programs is a good or bad thing...I think it is a good thing (even though expensive)! It gives people more opportunities and choices when it comes to deciding on their path to their flying career. It gives people who want post-secondary education to get it along with flight training. Also, there probably are prospective pilots who like to study, learn, and would probably want a master's or doctorate degree in addition to their licenses. A university degree would allow for that. I think it's good that there are more paths and opportunities to choose from. People can choose the path suitable to them based on their own personal circumstances.

After saying all that bs about university programs, I would like to clarify that I do not think someone from a university/college aviation program would necessarily be a better pilot than someone who trained at a local flight school. Many university/college aviation programs let local flight schools conduct the flight training anyway. The option of training at a local flight school will always remain a fast and the more inexpensive option (except for the students at Sault/Confederation ofcourse where government subsidies help them out). LIke mcconnell14 said, aviation is a weird industry. Exposure to real world, practical experience will always matter a lot. The number of hours you have will primarily determine whether you get the job and timing will determine your seniority. Your seniority will determine how much you're paid. I don't think there will be major changes to that equation. Airlines are definitely liking the idea of more highly educated pilots but I doubt they would be willing to pay them more. I don't think aviation degrees will take priority any time soon but maybe in the future, it will become more like the jobs where the requirements say "post-secondary education OR ___ years of experience" (replace years with hours ofcourse!). Whether or not this is to the disadvantage of a candidate with no post-secondary education...this depends on how you look at it I guess. Afterall, hours will still matter most. Having post-secondary education would be an extra line on your résumé. If someone chose to spend more years and money for university/college and that extra line on their résumé make them a better candidateto an employer, I would say it's still fair if they're chosen over someone without the education. I don't mean to sound arrogant but from the point of view of the airlines, the candiate who has the most hours, with the best résumé and interview accompanying the hours gets the job! I don't see an airline hiring someone with a degree+little experience and not someone without a degree but more experience though.

Just my little insight.

[C-FKLY]

IM not in any way saying university is a bad way to go, I just beleive that you should goto UNiversity because you want to learn more indeapth about weather and all those things nothing wrong with that...but if your going to University for a backup plan..then i don't like that idea. If your dream is being a pilot then don't worry about the economy and such...cuz i bet your backup plan will be affected as well then theres go you 60+ k

If you're refering to my earlier post, I just want to clarify a few things here. A backup plan is only a small part of why I plan on going to uni. I intend on entering the field of engineering because it's what I'd be good at, and what I'd enjoy. I'm a problem solver, an innovator, I have a passion for engineering topics, and I'm not bad at Physics or Calculus either. Right now I still do intend on a career as a pilot, but who knows, in 4 years I might just rather work as an engineer.

And I know you said don't worry about the economy, but frankly, right now it's pooped. Nobody's going anywhere in terms of jobs, especially the 'n00bs', so going to university will at least give the economy a few years to catch up. And if it doesn't, well, I'll have a degree as an edge over my generation of pilots. And, of course, if all fails, then I have a second career I can depend on.

[Blue Side Down]

Has the increased number of Aviation Degrees come out of industry demand or do some in the industry now demand one because they exist?

Negative on both counts. There was a lot of excess cash floating around in years past, and a few people figured it would be lucrative to incorporate flight training into a degree program. Turns out, surprise surprise, it's not, and hence kids pay an arm, leg and remaining foot to learn a trade in a university setting- all because the school's finance dept needs to see a profit by the end of the day.

Will the existence of Aviation Degrees cause pilot compensation to rise or will it simply increase the cost of obtaining a CPL?

No, yes.

Will we one day see companies paying pilots based on their level of post secondary education as well as their flying experience?

Unless the said position is as 'test pilot', no.

Will a pilot whom obtained his CPL at his hometown flying club or in his own aircraft or even at an Aviation College be at a clear disadvantage when he applies for a flying job?

No, and I'd go so far as to say the flying club and college grads will have an advantage over aviation degree'd kids. Think about it like this- a degree program takes five to six years of full time work and crams it in to four. Thing is, you cannot fit everything in. So, certain aspects of a quality education are lost... naw, we don't really need to teach atmospheric physics, that's too complex; an essay english course will stress the poor kids out too much in their first year, so we'll cut that requirement too; you know, we should teach a course on airport management... it'll be just like business management, but we'll take out the business part and just talk about airports and taxiways for three hours a week.

This is a chicken and egg scenario. By demand I mean that they look better on a resume. I guess what I'm trying to ask is whether the existence of Aviation Degrees is beneficial or detrimental to the industry?

Detrimental on the basis of diminished quality of education and lack of thoroughness. Aviation based college diplomas, on the other hand, are the greatest thing since gps direct for people looking to getting on with flying. Esp if subsidization is available.

[SAA340-600]

University is a chance for kids to gain insight into the world, arming them not only with knowledge and a thirst for learning but also a mind capable of critical thinking and heck it give you a possible career path. I am not saying college diplomas or degrees are not to be valued, its just to take a uni degree ( be it Ba,Bs, Ma or Phd) in atmospheric science, aerospace engineering is not only beneficial but in my opinion for people considering an airline career, should be a minimum education requirement, dumbing down aviation will not help anyone at all. They don't do it for surgeons and they should not for airline pilots (again different parts of the world have different views on this and so do companies).

On the other hand university is not for everyone and people strive under many various conditions, it all comes to the same boring thing in the end, managed or selected bla bla bla and really annoying delays. what ever floats your boat mate.

my two cents,
Cheers



"wrap it up!"

[Cold_Lake_Hvy]

Oh yeah?
One of the best F.Os i ever worked with was South African, lets just say he was worth 8000000$

[WTB:PPC]

*

[. ._]

University is a chance for kids to gain insight into the world, arming them not only with knowledge and a thirst for learning but also a mind capable of critical thinking and heck it give you a possible career path.

It has been my experience that University does not teach a person how think critically. At the undergraduate level, you are required to regurgitate what is necessary. That's it. IMHO, critical thinkers are born, not made. That being said, I think all education is good.

My $0.02.

-istp (the lifelong learner, because I've failed so much I have to keep doing it)

[Chelo]

I would say that university does promote critical thinking, but does not necessarily teach it. Many of the first year required courses provide students with the tools to be critical readers, more so than critical thinkers. What students do with these tools is up to them.

You are taught to be critical and to scrutinize anything you read, break down text/arguments/theses of literature and construct an argument/solution to either prove or dismiss. University is about time management and those who do well in university tend to be great time managers. You will not be given enough time to read the assigned class materials and it is up to the student to make the most of their time and study efficiently to get the highest grades possible.

[mcrit]

I would say that university does promote critical thinking, but does not necessarily teach it.

Depends on what you study. A 3 year non specialized BA, won't teach you much in the thinking dept. An Hons Sci, Math, or Eng degree will.