View Single Post
  #89   Report Post  
Old September 20th 05, 05:16 PM
Frank Gilliland
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 11:09:31 -0400, Michael Coslo
wrote in
:



Frank Gilliland wrote:


Now that's not an argument either for or against the dropping of the
code requirement. Like I said before, it's no big deal. And like I
also said before, what -IS- a big deal is the dumbing down of the
written test.


Sometimes I think that the "dumbing down" is a factor of the maturing
Ham looking at how things appear from the vantage point of time and
accumulated knowledge.

They might remember the test seeming very difficult when they took it.
Then they look at modern tests (if they even do look at them) and
conclude that the modern tests are exceptionally easy, when it is simply
that they have learned much in the years that have passed since their
own tests.



By "dumbing down" I was referring to the question pool being released
to the public where it can be memorized to some extent. As for the
level of technical expertise, I'm sure the content hasn't changed much
over the years (except maybe for the addition of semiconductors).

But then again, maybe the technical aspects of the test -should- be
'dumbed down'. Modern ham radios have digital PLL tuners, automatic
antenna matchers, audio signal processing..... I even saw one that had
a built-in Morse code decrypter. About all that's left for the ham to
learn anymore is on-air protocol and antennas. It's no wonder so many
hams are becoming appliance operators. Heck, the FCC would do just as
well to turn the service into several CB bands and drop the license.







----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----