Mike Coslo wrote:

And yet, it begs the question of *should* the tests be harder? And
were they harder back in the day?


A frequently heard position is that the elimination of the code test
should be counterbalanced by an increase in the difficulty and/or size
of the written test. I suggested that back when there still was a code
test, as a means of getting rid of the code test. At this point, I am
ambivalent on the topic. Considering the shrinking population of hams,
I'd like to keep the Technician test easy and advertise it as a foot in
the door, especially to persons who are interested in ham radio mainly
as a tool that is intended to serve other areas (emergency and disaster
relief, for example).


This is an oft contentious issue that I think it is possible that
memory might be playing a sort of trick on people.

I have done a little research on the subject, imcluding "study guides"
from the 1950's. I found the major difference was that the 1950s tests
apparently contained more tube oriented material.

I was also struck by the fact that some of the questions are verbatim
what they are now! Some of the electronic basics have not changed, and
there are apparently only so many ways to ask the same question.

My references are for Novice and General, and I can say that the Novice
written was very, very, easy. The General was of similar difficulty to
today's General test. When I can get materials for the Advanced, and
more importantly the Extra, I think I'll find a similar pattern.


I don't doubt that, but the elimination of essays and diagram drawing
questions has made the tests easier for some. Persons who can memorize
the material can get grades that are out of all proportion to their
knowledge of radio and electronics. Larger pools would change that.


My conclusions:

At least since the late 1950's, the testing was no more difficult than
it is now. Many of the questions have changed, but in the context of the
times it was quite similar.

Study guides were a substitute for question pools. Judging by the
verbatim content of some of the questions to what is in the question
pools, there must have been some relationship.

Perhaps one of the reasons that many people believe that the old time
tests were so much more difficult is that at the time, they were for the
test taker! Some yougster taking a General test back in 1957 would
indeed find the test hard. After a few decades of college, practical
learning, work, and experience, and a look at the new tests, one can be
excused in thinking that they are "easy", because after all the
knowledge accumulation, they are easy.

But not for everyone, and certainly the testing regimen should not be
tailored to the highest denominator, so to speak.


I found that to be true. In the late 1970's, I bought a copy of the
Ameco study guide for the phone-one test (the thick book with an orange
cover). I was unable to read it; I made absolutely no progress with it.
Earlier this year, I used it to study for the GROL and found it quite
easy. I wondered, at the time, whether that meant that I had become
smarter.
On the other hand, some of those old study guides were clearly
inadequate for the task. I have a copy of the "General Class Amateur
License Handbook" by Howard S. Pyle, W7OE, Sams Publications
[1961,1964,1968], 136 pages. You could MEMORIZE the entire book and
still not come close to passing the test. It just glossed over the
material.

--
Klystron