"Bill Sohl" ) writes:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
If the tests are going to be geared to "an average sixth grader", and
one of the requirements is to sign a paper stating that you have read
part 97, exactly what is the class going to consist of? And since ther
is a good possibility that the General test is going to end up being at
the level of the Technician license.
I know I'm mixing proposals there, but the point is, maybe the new
novice or communicator should be easy enough that people *don't* have to
take any classes for it.
I'm sure there will be some that won't need any class and
will study or learn independent of any formal instruction. I did
exactly that myself as a teenager for Novice & General in the 50's.
On the other hand, I'd have no problem teaching a class targeted at
whatever the Novice syllabus of test material might actually end
up being.
One benefit of a class of some sort is that it gets the local club
into view. ONe can make a stab at "controlling" the entry into
the hobby, which might not occur if someone reads about the hobby somewhere,
memorizes the test, and then is suddenly a ham with little connection
to it's history or any of the locals. Getting a ham license is
just a first step, and when someone is teaching a class they can
influence the newcomers in operating habits, infuse them with a sense
of the history of the hobby and even show excitement about CW. Plus,
there is (or should be) a level of interaction between the class members,
which should give them a start in the hobby.
I suspect this may be far more important than the learning that occurs
at the classes. I don't like the assumption that a class is the
only way to enter the hobby, but I like these side benefits.
When I was a kid, one had to be at least fifteen here in Canada
to get a license, so when I decided to get a ham license, it was
four years in the future. They changed the rule when I was twelve,
so I had over a year reading electronic hobby magazines and QST,
where I was learning without the goal being the getting of a license.
When the rules changed in late 1971 (well, the rule went into effect
some months later), I had to use the roundabout method of contacting
the ARRL to find a local code & theory class. And I entered that class
in February, at least half way into the course. It was the code
that I needed, and even coming in late I caught up. But it put me
in contact with the local club.
That seems like a long time for a code & theory class, looking back.
But of course, it was once a week for an hour or two. Obviously, while
the goal was to pass the test, it was not about getting the test out of
the way. A simpler test does not mean one has to merely teach the
questions on the test.
Michael VE2BVW
|