N2EY wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

If Pro CW Testing Amateurs a

Feet firmly planted in the past folks and elitist snobs......


Why wouldn't they WANT the Morse code testing eliminated so that they
could get on the air and only associate with like minded individuals?

Removing the test would be the ultimate filter.


The short answer is "because we're not 'elitist snobs' and our feet
are not 'firmly planted in the past'

The longer, more accurate answer is that it's not as simple as some
folks would like you to think.

For some, it really is "just about the code test". But for others, the
real issue is something variously called 'standards' or
'achievements'. That's where the real disagreement is. And it comes
out in a whole bunch of ways.

For me, it is about standards.


For example, how often have you heard the buzzphrases "it's a hobby"
or "it's just a hobby" or similar, given as an argument against some
requirement or another? Think about what the person pushing those
phrases really means. They're usually *not* saying "it's not a job".
Instead, what they're really saying is "don't expect much" or even
"don't expect anything".

Right. "Mongo say Learning BAD"!

Look at how the *written* exams have changed over the years, despite
claims that "it's just about the code test". Yet we have vocal support
for free upgrades and further written test reductions.

Did you see the article on "is training class efficient?" which
detailed a one-day-to-Tech cram course? They boasted an 85% success
rate - meaning that after just one day of class, 85% of their students
passed the Tech test. This was done by rote memorization of the
written exam question pool. Is this really what's best for the future
of the ARS? Some folks think so!

This is what almost all university students do. It's "cramming". And it
kind of works. The "kind of" part is that the knowledge does not make it
into long term memory. So while a person can take and pass a test using
this method, the knowledge gained goes away right after the test for the
most part.

But it isn't the fault of question pools - it is how they are used. I
used the pools and on line tests when I went for my tickets. First thing
I did was take an on line test. Then with the aid of the pool, reference
books and even the web, I looked up the answers to the questions that I
missed. I kept taking tests, and kept going back and learning what I missed.

By the time I was finished, I KNEW the answers, and it wasn't from
memorization, save the band edge stuff.

I put forth the proposition that it is just as easy to cram with
textbooks as it is with question pools. I can read a textbook as easily
as I can a question pool. It is all a question of how we use th etools
we are given. And no one can control that.


When you see arguments for "one class of license" ask "with what
requirements?" - but don't hold your breath waiting for an answer.

I like one class - Amateur Extra.

When you see people railing about "standards and requirements of the
1930s", ask what they propose as the "standards and requirements of
the 2000s" - but again, don't hold your breath waiting for a detailed
answer.

Some folks don't think there should be *any* standards or requirements
beyond a bare bones set of rules and regs from FCC. Of course we know
what happens in a radio service where that is the norm. It isn't
pretty.

Amazing that some of those people are otherwise smart.

- Mike KB3EIA -