Bull

How in the world do you go through the PCA National Instructor Certification Training without the classroom review and discussion? Key word is discussion.

SundayDriver

Here is an out of the box suggestion. For the advanced and maybe intermediate students, put the instructors on the corners, not in the passenger seat. I have both recieved coaching this way, and instructed at SCCA competition licensing schools - it is amazing how much you can tell about what the driver is doing from the corner, when you are really looking.

It would cut down on the instructor stress and needed headcount for these groups. Instructors would be in the car with novices where they are really needed. I would lay odds that the DE groups are so ingrained in what they do, that they would not try this, but they could stand to take a lesson from the pro schools and SCCA who have been teaching high performance driving for a very long time at pretty high levels.

Doc V.

1. Assign an instructor to every student in each run group.
2. Establish and use uniform criteria to determine if a student should be signed off to run solo.
____________
PCA National Instructor
GVC-BMWCCA Certified Instructor

Traffic53

i think one way to improve instruction is to make damn sure that we teach how to drive quickly, safely. too often, i hear instructors (myself too) comment on how their students are working on lowering corner entry speeds the first day ever on a track. this is tough. seems it's common that students carry too much speed into corners and have to work backwards (in my opinion) to get better. proper de instuction starts with the newbies. slow them down a bit. even as an instructor, the laps i learn the most on when driving, are the ones at 75%- the ones where there is absolutely no chance of having an off. by 75%, i mean short-shifting, even braking, perfect line, quiet tires, etc. this kind of driving will add 5% to the lap time. still thrilling, no risk.

students that have to be reeled-in are no good for anybody. students who gradually get quicker need far less intervention, and will probably learn the most while driving. the loonies who are all over will not likely learn from their experience. they'll push till they crash, or quit from frustration.

mitch236

Regarding more classroom education:
I have to say, this response really has me bewildered. You seem to feel that there needs to be no didactic education at all. You seem to think driving well is easy and should be self evident. I guess that's why there are so many books written on the subject. I guess that's why most (and I only say most becubecausean't prove all) professional racers use coaches. Are you an instructor? If so, for how long? I ask because it has been my experience that most students need more education, not less. They don't know the theory. Yes, it isn't rocket science, that's why so many folks can do it, but to be a good driver, you must have an understanding of the theory behind what you are trying to get the car to do.

Jump off the gas in a corner with a 996 GT-3 at the limit of adhesion and "No Problem"? I don't even have to answer that one!

Still, I have taken your suggestions under consideration.

Corner workers aren't there to critique drivers. As long as a driver is safe, the flagger has nothing to add. They have too much to watch to really give feedback about the quality of the drivers.


(Sorry if my responses are out of order, I still don't know how to break down the quotes to reply individually)

Willard Bridgham 3

I find that, in a volunteer organization (PCA), whoever is chief instructor wants to codify what will be taught in the classroom for his region. Chief instructor spends the winter writing out in detail what will be taught, both in the classroom and on the track.

This leads to many, many bad track lessons that are carried by the student to the next event and next instructor who, incredulous, tries to get the student in the learning mode again.

I think national certification will help with this problem....at least the mistakes will be consistent from region to region.

(on point 3)If it were possible to teach people how to drive fast and competently in a classroom, there would be no need for track time.....also, the guy who talked most would be tha fastest driver????...

1AS

Since the classroom basics are the same, why not provide a dvd that is required for novices before they show up?
Skip Barber uses a graduated red line approach, that I think is helpful for new students. As the cars get more powerful, starting redline should be lower. I'm curious about how much of the rev range you think someone in a 997 needs in their first 2 sessions?
Personally, I think you see more from inside the car than outside, and get better real time feedback from an inside-the-car instructor.
My observation is that if you are teaching heel-toe braking/downshifting, it may take more than 20 minutes to get the hang of it. But, after that, I think 20 mile intervals work well for observation, discussion, assimilation, contemplation, mental replays etc. Doing the same thing wrong over and over for longer doesn't help.AS

mitch236

If that were the case, I would win!!!!

Obviously, the most valuable learning tool is seat time. It's just that didactic education is important and shouldn't be overlooked. I can tell you that the few classrooms I have taught have always ended with students telling me they wish someone had mentioned this (whatever "this" was) before.

agio

Capt, with all do respect...
Trying to response to your reply to Mitch:
"I disagree. If your student is getting squirrelly, pull them into the pits for a bit. It does not matter if it's been three minutes, or thirty."
The point was to allow enough time to have the "paddock" instruction reinforce the "on track" instruction. Whether it's a 20, 25 or 30 minute run; have adequate time for review "away from the track. Unstable drivers, no matter how many minutes out on the track, must come off--we all do agree with you.

"Why? The concepts are easy. Even the application is not rocket science. What students really need is practice."
Rocket science, indeed. Why are you reluctant to strive for and achieve more driver proficiency through training? Practice, is what we all need. But practice ought to include not only seat time, but reinforcement through continued training protocols such as in classrooms.

"Should not be necessary. A 'lacking' driver will either get flagged, or complained about. Corner workers rule as observers. They do a great job. "
You're off on this one as well. The flagger is "reporting" on the result; the observation, whether in the car or at the flagging station, is what will help achieve better driving to avoid the obvious result. So, the senior staff can help eliminate those very sutle (sometimes not so) issues which plague us all.

"I think late model cars have nothing to do with it. I find that with PCM, ABS, and all the other electronics, students can get away with all sorts of stuff. Shift in a corner? Jump off the gas in a corner? No problem! The cars are easier to drive. I’ll agree that the speed new cars can obtain that can be disconcerting when a green students at the wheel. However, any instructor worth their salt will have a variety of ways to limit the speed a student can reach."
There seems to be a real reticence on you having an open mind to accept the "possibilty" that a driver, particularly a student, can have a 170 mph car with a 70 mph brain. Even with all of the safety amenities, can't you envision that any driver with limited skill levels are more likely to get into some difficulty under the fast car/inexperienced student scenario?

Capt. Carrera

...and...
Y'all miss my point. For example, I agree class time has great value. But we are not trying to simply teach students the concepts and flags. Like playing music, driving is very much an applied skill. You have to practice it.

But let’s get back to the point I’m trying to make. I advocate not having too many blanket stipulations students must meet. Rather I favor letting instructors do their job. Right now Instructors can make whatever stipulations they feel are best. You want a student to stay under 80? Tell them to stay under 80. You want them to leave PCM on? Tell them to leave it on. You don’t want to sign the student off? Don’t.

Here is what I think the litmus test for blanket edicts should be. Will it increase the student's fun? Will it allow them to learn faster? Will it make them safer? Will it attract instructors and new students? Or are we unknowingly elevating our accomplishments by making the rules more arduous for those who follow?

mitch236

Not to harp on this but even with music, you need some didactic instruction to learn fast. Sure you can be self taught but that is the long route. In driving however, if you make a mistake it can be costly and hopefully, some didactic instruction can help prevent costly mistakes and bad habit formation.

The litmus test should start with SAFETY. I really don't care if a student is having fun if he is unafe. I am sure that good classroom education will help a student learn faster and that should lead to more fun. As far as attracting more instructors, I think limiting student ratios to 1:1 will do that.


The real consideration is that DE was started as a way to get your street car onto a track and have some fun. That is still true today but things have changed. The cars have gotten much faster. The driver field has gotten much more serious. The expectations of keeping all of us safe have gotten very serious.


What I am trying to do is setup some basic ideas that I can present to our local clubs as a jumping off point. All instructors should be properly educated and PCA national has taken a needed step forward in that direction. We should strive for higher standards. Instructors should all be on the same page when instructing our students. I'm sure that when you go to a skippy school, there is a sense of agreement about how to drive. That's what I would like to see in our clubs.

JCP911S

[QUOTE=Capt. Carrera
But let’s get back to the point I’m trying to make. I advocate not having too many blanket stipulations students must meet. Rather I favor letting instructors do their job. ?[/QUOTE]


Yes I tend to agree... there is a fine line between structure and tying one's hands.

Right now, the Instructor is given wide latitutde to determine what is the best way to teach a student. I think this is critical.

I vary my instruction significantly based on an individual students inate skill, level of experience, interest and goals and abilty to learn...

As a baseline approach, I generally pick the thing the student does best and re-inforce that, and pick the thing the student needs the most work on and focus on that... these vary greatly from student to student and weekend to weekend.

My minimum goal is for the student to go home having improved significantly in one area... if they can do more, great, but you can't throw the whole toolkit at them at once and expect then to absorb it all.

I think it is very important to give the instructor the ability to fit the lesson to the student rather than force the student to fit the lesson.

kurt M

Fully agree! Thisis the key to instructing, being able to use you training to adapt your lessons to the students needs and learning methods.

Capt. Carrera

Ah, yes... We use the same approach.

AMG951

Just a couple of comments on your original question on making the instructors better.

I've been instructing in PCA since 92 and have been involved with many corporate events organized at our home track with Pro racers.

I must say that PCA has a better teaching structure and philosophy than anything I know off. The emphasis is on teaching. I'll say that in the good old days, we would show up at the track and anybody who had some track experience would be asked to sit with a student and show them around. I'm sure it doesn't happen anymore. Right?

Here's a couple of thoughts:

1- I've had as much as three students on an event. 2 full greenies (One in white) and a check ??? ride in blue. I don't believe it does any good for the students or the instructor. The instructor has to keep his concentration for all students and get on the track for his own group. It was not fun (or safe) at the end of the day...We managed (so far) to limit one student per instructor.

2- We've tried to have three 30 minutes sessions compared to four 20 minutes. For the instructor and student, we saw advantages to the shorter sessions. Of course there is no substitute for seat time but it has to be enjoyable and focused seat time. We saw the concentration level and incident rate increase with the longer sessions and we went back to the 20 minutes sessions. Of course some students (and instructors!) will keep their concentration up for longer but we go for the lowest common denominator...

3- We did invite (many times) Pro racers to help us. It was always fun (as they showed us a couple of fast tricks) , did it help our teaching? No. Their main job is not teaching, it's racing. Our best invested money was with Bill Buff because we all worked on teaching.

4- I believe it's important to organize instructor days to bring new and old instructors on the same page and assess new candidate. It's the best time for an invited guess.

5- I also see too many instructors who don't have communication device (Chatter box). It becomes very tiring to yell all day...I find it almost impossible to work without one.

Hoping it helps.