Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo writes:


N2EY wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo

writes:

I wonder how many people DO memorize the question pools as opposed to
doing the background work.

There was an article on the ARRL website a few months ago about an

"efficient"

"Tech in a day" class. The authors (who were not ARRL staff, btw) went on

about

their high success rate and 'efficiency' in getting people licensed.

Basically their method was to simply review the Tech question pool. A quick
cram course, and then the test. First-time pass rate of more than 85% IIRC.

The article caused such a stir that it was quickly pulled. ;-)

I don't doubt it! That is the "cramming route", and it is a horrible
way to learn - or not learn - anything.


That group of VEs have their own website. If anyone "pulled" that,
it was the VEs themselves, for different reasons than not conforming
to the Blessed Status Quo.

There's a great deal of contention on the TEST. Some say it MUST
be passed. Others complain that "nobody is learning anything."

The implication is that the Olde Wayes are the ONLY way to go.

Some think so

Passing the amateur test only yields personal authorization to
transmit RF energy on certain frequencies using certain modes
and modulations, always abiding by federal regulations thereto.

True.

I'd say that a "quickie cram course" fulfills getting a license. The
license is not, nor was it ever, any "degree" or academic certificate
of learning anything. The FCC is not chartered to be an academic
organization.

Oh, it fulfills it all right. And thousands (hundreds millions?) of
university students work it that way. Is that a good thing though? I'll
reserve the right to think that if there is a test, I'll figure out
what's being tested and go learn it. Some people may or may not want to
do that. If they want to cram and forget, so be it. No law says I have
to like it! 8^)


I say such courses actually do new hams a disservice because they are left

with

a license but not the knowledge or skills they need to use it.

Right. All that does is puts the test material into mid-term memory,
and from there it goes we know not where.


You can say that about any test in any activity...and find living proof
of it as examples.

Amateur radio is NOT a profession, guild, union, or other craft. Any
amateur radio person can be as good or bad as they care to be. A
few questions on a single test (renewable by electronic or mail means
as long as the FCC allows it, no retesting required if done within time
limits). The "importance" of having amateur smarts seems more like
some kind of self-defined role-model fantasy of many. But, it is still a
fantasy and is NOT an absolute requirement of any true officiating
body.


I don't know if anyone offers "General in a day" or "Extra in a day"

courses,

but I have read of a "GROL in a day" course. Money-back guarantee, IIRC.


A "GROL" is a COMMERCIAL license. Why is that used as an
example in an AMATEUR newsgroup?

I never took any test for a "GROL." After I was released from active
duty - and three years working in communications on HF through
low microwaves - I was able to borrow the entire FCC rulebook
(in 1956 those came in loose-leaf form). I just memorized a lot of
that in two weeks of intensive "cramming" on regulations. I didn't
need any technical studying. Passed the First Phone test in one
sitting (including a mass interruption of the whole Chicago Federal
building while they had a fire drill).

All that the "cramming" did was allow me to pass the test, receive
the desired license, and fulfill some personnel requirements to work
at radio and television stations. Did I "know" everything? No. There
were no technically up-to-date schools on the broadcast industry or
much of the entire electronics industry. One learned specific
technical things on-the-job. No problem. Got the required work done,
got the monetary compensation. Everyone satisfied enough.

The state of Illinois finally got around to having a job category of
"electronics technician" and "electronics engineer" roughly in the
early 1970s...despite the existance of Motorola and Zenith and
Admiral in the Chicago area with large numbers of those
occupations. [one reason why I never collected anything in the
way of monies for not having a regular job in 1956...heh]

The technology of electronics (radio is a subset of that whole) is
constantly changing, expanding, discovering new things. Schools
can't keep up with the pace, are always lagging. Look at amateur
radio technology...is the technology of today much like that of 40
years ago (like 1964)? Not much. Someone who passed their last
ham test 40 years ago certainly can't be "up to date" on modern
day ham technology WITHOUT doing their own education on both
technology and operating skills. Yes, a CW-only hold-off can
concentrate solely on that and play guru...but a guru circa 1964,
not of 2004.


Its a *lot* of questions between the three pools.


That word "lot" is highly subjective, not useful for quantifying anything
to a large and varied group of people.

Again, the amateur radio test is NOT an academic thing and amateur
radio is NOT a profession, guild, union, or craft requiring knowledge of
a certain kind. Amateur radio is a basically a hobby. Nobody gets
fired from a "job" in amateur radio, receiving some kind of severence
check.


? If you are going the rote route, you have to do something, because
you don't know which questions will be used.


Irrelevant. The detractors of the open QP say "it can be memorized!."
Entire. "Size of the QP is not object" to some detractors. :-)


Just like a passing grade anywhere else


Just what do you think the amateur radio test IS? An applicant
either passes or fails. Simple. Do you lose any job prospects
if you fail an amateur test?



4) A guess is as good as gold.

True of any multiple guess test I guess.


"Fool's gold." Probability of a correct answer given four possibles
is too low to pass the test. NO "gold."


There we agree for sure. The learning process for my General and Extra
tests was *fun*. Certainly the Extra was more difficult, taking around a
week of fairly intense study and reference. But it was still enjoyable.


Anything interesting is fun to learn about. Tests aren't needed to
have fun.


Can a person do one of those license in a day things? I guess. They
have my sympathy.


As I recall my first full day at ADA transmitters, we were able to QSY
most of the transmitters after a half-day's on-the-job instruction. NONE
of the newcomers were experienced on those fixed-station trans-
mitters; those weren't taught in any Signal schools. 1 KW to 15 KW
RF power output, all circuits operational 24/7.



But we can't dictate how people pass the tests, only that they do pass
them.


The "dictation" seems to be endmic with the OFs. They condemn
any test that is different from the one They took...


And I suspect that almost all new Hams try to do this the right way.


What is "the right way?"

Is anyone going to lose their job for not doing it "the right way?"

Is not passing a ham test going to subtract from college credits?

Will your family, friends, neighbors all shun you if you fail a ham
test?

The "right way" is obviously an opinion. People following the thread
will figure out that my version of the right way is to use whatever is
given to you as study tools, and that which you don't know, you go find
out about. Other's right way may include your Olde Tyme Hamme tests
(whatever they were) one day cramming, or even elimination of all test
requirements.


Us readers in Reality Land can't comprehend what "the right way"
is in the individual, subjective fantasylands of the OFs, only conjecture
on their "importance of doing it the right way."

Stressing some (mythical?) "right way" without explaining what this
"right way" is gets a bit wearying and doesn't offer any quantitative
proof that it IS any sort of "right way."

But, one can be sure that all the OFs "did it the right way" because
they passed and will never have to worry about taking another ham
test in their lives. They can feel secure in looking down Their noses
at those who haven't taken that particular test.

Who knows, I'm not an OF.... yet. Hope I eventually get to be one
because the alternative ain't much fun.