Robert, my apologies for taking so long to reply to your first post. I had begun my post; was about three paragraphs into it actually when my computer flashed and everything went away. Everything, including my post and the thought process going on behind it. You know how you have an idea and then you get on a roll trying to make your point. Well that's were I was. Now, that being said, and having read further your comments in some of your follow up posts I have a better idea of what y our thinking is. It also will let me be brief in my suggestion. When you gather your staff around you to see what they come up with tell them to BE BOLD! That's right, BE BOLD!
The P1 includes a chapter on communicating with ATC. Well hell, how about we expand that simple chapter so that the pilot has to not just know who does what, but actually knows how to receive instructions. Wait, BE BOLD! Let's send them home with a cheat sheet similar to a controller alias file so that he can read how to ask for a clearance, or know what the TWR controller is going to say before he says it.
BE BOLD! Expand the P1 training to include the basics of what they need to know, not what the VATSIM guidelines say they need to know. Take the top three problems as decided upon by the general controller community and find a way to address them earlier in the program.
Frankly, who cares if the pilot knows how to fly a VFR pattern if all he ever does is screw up every approach he attempts. So BE BOLD! and find a way to work a simple RNAV approach into the coursework sooner rather than later. Give your instructors the flexibility to deviate from the coursework if he sees the pilot needs work on a specific issue. Trust them to make the call to BE BOLD! and skip a subject only to replace it with another.
I could go on citing examples, but then so could everyone reading this. You know that box that your program fits very neatly into? Well, burn it. Then you can think outside of that box.
Good luck.
