|
One way to promote learning of code ...
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007 10:14:17 -0500, "Carl R. Stevenson"
wrote: wrote in message oups.com... snip The code test acts as a sort of Great Equalizer, Absurd ... ALL that a code test does is indicate that you can copy Morse at some specified speed. Nothing more, nothing less. IIRC, the Great Equalizer was created by Samuel Colt, not Samuel Morse! :) snip 73, Carl - wk3c 73 es KC de Jim, N2EY 73, Leo |
One way to promote learning of code ...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith I wrote: No, the new generation of hams will make it obsolete and history! Like AM? -- The invention of the motorcycle did not make the bicycle obsolete. The invention of the car did not make walking obsolete. Power boats did not make all sailboats obsolete, although many sailboats were replaced by power boats. People still *run* marathons, even though they'd go a lot faster with a lot less effort if roller skates were used. AM did not become obsolete when SSB was invented. Morse Code did not become obsolete when voice and RTTY were invented. There will still be people who CHOOSE to use Morse if it's presented to them as fun and they're allowed to make the choice without intimidation (and without berating them) And if there's available spectrum and other Morse Code operators. Except for a few people who learned Morse Code elsewhere, most would-be hams don't have any prior Morse Code skill. True ... The code test acts as a sort of Great Equalizer, Absurd ... Not at all. ALL that a code test does is indicate that you can copy Morse at some specified speed. Nothing more, nothing less. IMHO, that's a rather shortsighted view. Consider this statement: ALL that a written test does is indicate that you can pick out at least the minimum required number of correct multiple-choice answers in a test where all of the questions and answers are freely available beforehand. Nothing more, nothing less. In addition, as long as you don't cheat, FCC does not care how you get the right answers, nor which questions you get right or wrong. They don't care if you memorized, or if you guessed, or if you really understand the material. They also don't care if you have a Ph.D in EE, etc. - you get the same test. Note that FCC *eliminated* the multiple-choice Morse Code test option, leaving only the one-minute-solid-copy and fill-in-the-blanks options. because almost everyone starts out as a clueless newbie with the mode. True ... Morse Code cannot be learned by simply reading a book, visiting some websites or picking up a little bit here and there. A newcomer cannot cut-and-paste his/her way to a new skill, or rely on past achievements or claims to get around it. It's a skill that is easily measured and cannot be faked. And it puts a Final Authority wannabe on the same footing as a Young Squirt. It may be precisely this equalizing effect that makes some folks want to get rid of it. The implication above that everything about ham radio except Morse is "cut-and-paste" is also absurd. I intended no such implication - because it would be absurd. The point I was making is that *passing the written tests* is/was a very different thing from passing the Morse Code tests, particularly if someone had some background in electricity or electronics. Which is much more likely today than someone having background in Morse Code. The written exams, particularly Element 2, do not begin to cover "everything about ham radio except Morse". Nor do they cover any subject in much depth, IMHO. In my experience, most people can accumulate a lot of "book learning" type knowledge by "here and there" methods. Skills like Morse Code usually cannot be learned that way. Whether that's good or bad is a matter of opinion. I was talking night before last with Ed Hare - remember the 3 page study guide that he had for his novice test and compare that, as he does, to the 200+ pages of "Now You're Talking" - there has been NO "dumbing down" for entry into ham radio. How anyone could assert with honesty and a straight face that 200+ pages of material is "dumbed down" compared to 3 pages is something that simply is unfathomable. I have debunked W1RFI's "200 page" myth several times - including in person. I wish you'd been there for that one, Carl. Comparing the "Now You're Talking" book to the Novice study guide in old LMs is comparing apples and oranges. Here's why: 1) The LM study guide mentioned was for the old 1year nonrenewable Novice license. Today's Now You're Talking (NYT) is for the Technician, which conveys many more privileges. 2) The LM study guide wasn't complete - one also had to study the regulations, which were in the back of the book. 3) The LM study guides were in the form of essay questions and answers. The NYT book gives the exact Q&A used in the exams. 4) Just *one* of the old LM questions could generate a whole raft of possible multiple choice exam questions. NYT gives the exact Q&A. 5) The old LMs weren't meant to be a stand-alone introduction to amateur radio. They were simply intended as a guide to what was on the exams, and the procedures to get a license. In truth they weren't even complete, because they did not cover how to learn Morse Code. (ARRL sold another fifty-cent book for that). NYT is meant as a complete introduction. It would be fairer to compare NYT with a set of the old ARRL intro books (the LM, "How To Become A Radio Amateur", "Learning the RadioTelegraph Code" and possibly "Understanding Amateur Radio). 6) The old Novice was a one-year one-time nonrenewable license. The Technician isn't. Try comparing the *content* of some of the questions - and not just for the old Novice. Nobody really knows how "hard" the old exams really were, because they're not available for comparison. I will repost some study questions from the old License Manual - they're the best we've got. I think it's time to stop trying to attribute mythical powers to the soon to be history Morse test. To continue only perpetuates the falsehood that Morse skill is essential to being a good ham, capable of contributing, etc. It's one tool in the toolbox. That's all. A very useful tool, though. Have fun with Morse and promote it in a kind and polite way if you wish, but please lose the attitude that Morse somehow is the measure of a "REAL ham." Please point out where I have ever written that one must have Morse Code skill to be "a real ham". The "equalizer" idea is simply to point out that almost all hams who try to learn it start at the same place. That's not true of the written exams. IMHO 73 es KC de Jim, N2EY |
One way to promote learning of code ...
|
Some Sample Study Questions From The Old License Manuals
From the 1976 ARRL License Manual:
Study Question #31: Draw a schematic diagram of a circuit having the following components: (a) battery with internal resistance, (b) resistive load, (c) voltmeter, (d) ammeter. Study Question #32: From the values indicated by the meters in the above circuit, how can the value of the resistive load be determined? How can the power consumed by the load be determined? Study Question #33: In the above circuit, what must the value of the resistive load be in order for the maximum power to be delivered from the battery? Study Question #34: Draw the schematic diagram of an RF power amplifier circuit having the following components: (a) triode vacuum tube, (b) pi-network output tank, (c) high voltage source, (d) plate-current meter, (e) plate-voltage meter, (f) rf chokes, (g) bypass capacitors, coupling capacitor. Study Question #35: What is the proper tune-up procedure for the above circuit? These are just a sample. They're not the exact questions that were on the old exams. The actual exam was multiple choice, and would show a schematic of the amplifier circuit - close, but not exactly like the one shown inthe license manual - and had 5 of the components labelled "a" thru "e". The question would be something like, "which is the coupling capacitor?" "which is an rf chokes?" "what is the function of the capacitor labelled ''d' in the circuit above?" How they compare to the current exams is a matter of opinion. IMHO the old exams covered fewer subjects but covered them in much more detail. These weren't study questions for the Extra written test. Nor were they study questions for the Advanced written test. Nor were they study questions for the Technician/General written test. They were for the 1976 *Novice* written exam. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
One way to promote learning of code ...
From: "Carl R. Stevenson" on Sun, Jan 7 2007 10:14 am
wrote in message Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith I wrote: No, the new generation of hams will make it obsolete and history! Like AM? -- The invention of the motorcycle did not make the bicycle obsolete. The invention of the car did not make walking obsolete. Power boats did not make all sailboats obsolete, although many sailboats were replaced by power boats. However, in the wider view of ALL world radio, manual morse code radiotelegraphy HAS become obsolete. The ONLY radio service using it for (alleged) communications is the ARS (Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society). There will still be people who CHOOSE to use Morse if it's presented to them as fun and they're allowed to make the choice without intimidation (and without berating them) Soon-to-be-legal R&O 06-178 is about the *TEST*, Carl. :-) [in case you've forgotten...possibly since the NCI web site didn't appear to know it until after a week had passed after the FCC announcement...just a deduction] Is there any earth-shaking regulation changes about morse code USE in FCC 06-178? I don't think so... Except for a few people who learned Morse Code elsewhere, most would-be hams don't have any prior Morse Code skill. True ... That exchange is rather worthless. Miccolis phrased his statement to imply that would-be hams "must" have morsemanship skill. Miccolis is good at such...:-) If anyone wants to bother checking the numbers of NEW radio amateur licensees - other than via the AH0A pro- morse-uber-alles website - they would find that NEW ham licensees were coming via the no-code-test Tech class. By a ratio of five to one (give or take). The code test acts as a sort of Great Equalizer, Absurd ... ALL that a code test does is indicate that you can copy Morse at some specified speed. Nothing more, nothing less. I have to call Miccolis' statement something different. "Absurd" is too understated. It is *bull***** fresh from the bovine enclave. because almost everyone starts out as a clueless newbie with the mode. True ... Not quite, Carl. Miccolis' implication is once again that morsemanship is the "true" measure of "ham." The use of the label "clueless newbie" is the sneering look-down-the-nose from the arrogance of superiority. Morse Code cannot be learned by simply reading a book, visiting some websites or picking up a little bit here and there. A newcomer cannot cut-and-paste his/her way to a new skill, or rely on past achievements or claims to get around it. There's that wonderful implication again...all 'true' hams will want to learn morsemanship, that it MUST be learned. :-) It's a skill that is easily measured and cannot be faked. And it puts a Final Authority wannabe on the same footing as a Young Squirt. It may be precisely this equalizing effect that makes some folks want to get rid of it. The implication above that everything about ham radio except Morse is "cut-and-paste" is also absurd. Just more *bull***** from the "master", Carl. :-) The signs are there (almost in neon brightness) of his being 'wounded' in the great word war in here. [note his choice of labels...:-) ] I was talking night before last with Ed Hare - remember the 3 page study guide that he had for his novice test and compare that, as he does, to the 200+ pages of "Now You're Talking" - there has been NO "dumbing down" for entry into ham radio. How anyone could assert with honesty and a straight face that 200+ pages of material is "dumbed down" compared to 3 pages is something that simply is unfathomable. "Dumbed down" = Lack of morse code skill. That's been how it has been used by the morseodists in here. They equate intelligence with morsemanship. Please don't expect them to use such "intelligence" in figuring out reality... :-( I think it's time to stop trying to attribute mythical powers to the soon to be history Morse test. To continue only perpetuates the falsehood that Morse skill is essential to being a good ham, capable of contributing, etc. WHOA! *HERESY* alert! [thou defilest thy maker!] Say 50 Hail Hirams, go thee and sin no more! Have fun with Morse and promote it in a kind and polite way if you wish, but please lose the attitude that Morse somehow is the measure of a "REAL ham." Only the Food and Drug Administration determines which are "real hams" and which are not... :-) Tsk, to reiterate, FCC 07-178 is about morse code TESTING, not its use. To Morseodists this newsgrope is all about their LOSING their ability to "lead" amateur radio...as they've become accustomed (with all the superiority of royalty). Their fantasy world of "control" is about to collapse. Poor things. snif snif Not to worry, Marie A. is sending them some cake... :-) |
Some Sample Study Questions From The Old License Manuals
|
One way to promote learning of code ...
From: "Carl R. Stevenson" on Sun, Jan 7 2007 10:14 am
wrote in message Cecil Moore wrote: John Smith I wrote: No, the new generation of hams will make it obsolete and history! Like AM? -- The invention of the motorcycle did not make the bicycle obsolete. The invention of the car did not make walking obsolete. Power boats did not make all sailboats obsolete, although many sailboats were replaced by power boats. However, in the wider view of ALL world radio, manual morse code radiotelegraphy HAS become obsolete. The ONLY radio service using it for (alleged) communications is the ARS (Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society). There will still be people who CHOOSE to use Morse if it's presented to them as fun and they're allowed to make the choice without intimidation (and without berating them) Soon-to-be-legal R&O 06-178 is about the *TEST*, Carl. :-) [in case you've forgotten...possibly since the NCI web site didn't appear to know it until after a week had passed after the FCC announcement...just a deduction] Is there any earth-shaking regulation changes about morse code USE in FCC 06-178? I don't think so... Except for a few people who learned Morse Code elsewhere, most would-be hams don't have any prior Morse Code skill. True ... That exchange is rather worthless. Miccolis phrased his statement to imply that would-be hams "must" have morsemanship skill. Miccolis is good at such...:-) If anyone wants to bother checking the numbers of NEW radio amateur licensees - other than via the AH0A pro- morse-uber-alles website - they would find that NEW ham licensees were coming via the no-code-test Tech class. By a ratio of five to one (give or take). The code test acts as a sort of Great Equalizer, Absurd ... ALL that a code test does is indicate that you can copy Morse at some specified speed. Nothing more, nothing less. I have to call Miccolis' statement something different. "Absurd" is too understated. It is *bull***** fresh from the bovine enclave. because almost everyone starts out as a clueless newbie with the mode. True ... Not quite, Carl. Miccolis' implication is once again that morsemanship is the "true" measure of "ham." The use of the label "clueless newbie" is the sneering look-down-the-nose from the arrogance of superiority. Morse Code cannot be learned by simply reading a book, visiting some websites or picking up a little bit here and there. A newcomer cannot cut-and-paste his/her way to a new skill, or rely on past achievements or claims to get around it. There's that wonderful implication again...all 'true' hams will want to learn morsemanship, that it MUST be learned. :-) It's a skill that is easily measured and cannot be faked. And it puts a Final Authority wannabe on the same footing as a Young Squirt. It may be precisely this equalizing effect that makes some folks want to get rid of it. The implication above that everything about ham radio except Morse is "cut-and-paste" is also absurd. Just more *bull***** from the "master", Carl. :-) The signs are there (almost in neon brightness) of his being 'wounded' in the great word war in here. [note his choice of labels...:-) ] I was talking night before last with Ed Hare - remember the 3 page study guide that he had for his novice test and compare that, as he does, to the 200+ pages of "Now You're Talking" - there has been NO "dumbing down" for entry into ham radio. How anyone could assert with honesty and a straight face that 200+ pages of material is "dumbed down" compared to 3 pages is something that simply is unfathomable. "Dumbed down" = Lack of morse code skill. That's been how it has been used by the morseodists in here. They equate intelligence with morsemanship. Please don't expect them to use such "intelligence" in figuring out reality... :-( I think it's time to stop trying to attribute mythical powers to the soon to be history Morse test. To continue only perpetuates the falsehood that Morse skill is essential to being a good ham, capable of contributing, etc. WHOA! *HERESY* alert! [thou defilest thy maker!] Say 50 Hail Hirams, go thee and sin no more! Have fun with Morse and promote it in a kind and polite way if you wish, but please lose the attitude that Morse somehow is the measure of a "REAL ham." Only the Food and Drug Administration determines which are "real hams" and which are not... :-) Tsk, to reiterate, FCC 06-178 is about morse code TESTING, not its use. To Morseodists this newsgrope is all about their LOSING their ability to "lead" amateur radio...as they've become accustomed (with all the superiority of royalty). Their fantasy world of "control" is about to collapse. Poor things. snif snif Not to worry, Marie A. is sending them some cake... :-) |
One way to promote learning of code ...
|
One way to promote learning of code ...
Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote: Nobody really knows how "hard" the old exams really were, because they're not available for comparison. But the ARRL License Manuals are still around, e.g. The unit of resistance is the ______. A. Volt B. Amp C. Watt D. Ohm .... and how did I memorize that resistance color code, Every Good Boy Does Violet? No, let me see ... chuckle JS |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:30 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com