Do you see this as making the advanced course more expensive if they have to be examined or are you referring to the commercial aspect of the course only
I think the two things are distinct. I suppose an individual now has more choices depending on what they want to do:
• Take the Advanced Course leading to an Advanced Certificate. As stated this cannot be endorsed. This is as it is already and is the logical approach for someone keen to further their skills and experience.
Commercial users have three options as I see it:
1. Take the ‘exam’
2. Take their Advanced Certificate as a precursor to the exam, then do the exam.
3. Spend time with a school ‘training’ for the exam. This may or may not include the actual Advanced Course.
Clearly individuals will take their own view as to what serves them best but I suspect option 3 will appeal for individuals without Dayskipper Theory (or equivalent knowledge) as they need to be up to speed such that they can handle questions from the Dayskipper Theory exam with ease. Schools will spend time therefore with some people in a mini Dayskipper Theory type course helping them up to the level ahead of their assessment.
On balance I don’t think it will make much difference for schools financially. Whereas previously everyone who wanted the commercial endorsement took the Advanced Certificate now they have more options one of which doesn’t involve a school at all. Clearly only someone who is going to use the Commercial Endorsement will go to the effort needed to acquire it and I suspect people will divide fairly equally between the 3 options.
Ultimately what counts here is that these changes ensure that those that get Commercially Endorsed are very capable of being so. Equally, at a stroke School’s positions are easier as whilst someone may reach the standard for their Advanced Certificate they may not necessarily be at the level you would want them to be to take fee paying passengers out. This has always been a difficult area for Advanced Instructors.