Ian White GM3SEK wrote in news:xG9HBmG1ReIGFAV3
@ifwtech.co.uk:

Owen Duffy wrote:

One of the risks to ham radio of the new six-hour hams is our feeding
them with inappropriate and inadeqate dumbed down models. I suppose it
is not new, this is probably the root of most of the myths of ham radio

Not new at all... There's a huge amount of new stuff for beginners
to
learn, so they need simplified ideas to get them started. But it
shouldn't ever have to be about unlearning. We shouldn't be feeding
them
false ideas that they will need to throw away completely.

Our local radio club does a lot of teaching, and at all levels we try
to
say: "Learn this to check the right box in the exam, but remember
something else about it: it isn't a hard fact. It's actually an onion."

At the next level, we peel away a few more of the skins. The aim is
always to show them how last year's simplified information fits into a
bigger and deeper picture. We don't want them to throw the old
information away; at the next level we want them to keep it, understand
what was right about it, and also see its limitations.

At least, that's what we are aiming for. The challenge for the teacher
to live up to it.

Ian,

That sounds a good approach, and it doesn't betray the trust that
learners should have in their trainers.

When ham radio is being reduced to a "communicator" hobby, it is worth
emphasising that there is great opportunity for personal development and
satisfaction in working through those layers. Some of us think that is
what ham radio is about, the ITU does, ITU-R RR Article 1 says "1.56
Amateur service: A radiocommunication service for the purpose of self-
training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by
amateurs, that is, by duly authorised persons interested in radio
technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest".

Owen