Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Feb 23 is the No-code date
From: Steve Bonine on Fri, Jan 19 2007 8:20 pm
The difference is that in today's environment the student learns how to pass the test, rather than learning the actual material. Instead of learning E=IR, today's student memorizes the specific questions/answers on Ohm's law that are in the question pool. They might be able to tell you that the voltage drop across a 2 ohm resistor with 2 amps of current was 4 volts, but if you asked them why that was the case or what it meant, they wouldn't have a clue. Or care. Good post, but I have to dispute a few things in your paragraph. For example, on tests and testing. In "today's environment" the "students" seem to be about as willing and knowledge-hungry as when I was in high school. [graduating class of 1951...:-)] To further define that, SOME students cared and SOME students didn't much give a snit, most of those in between varied considerably. I can see the same basic attitudes of invididuals now as back then...if one strips off the veneer of what is/was social behavior in their peer group. [that seems to cloud many folks observation capability...of those who had a different social environment/mores/ethos]. As a working design engineer for a long time, I've NEVER questioned the "why" of Ohm's Law of Resistance. It simply WAS. It's just one of the many laws of radio-related physics. Yes, I suppose I could write up a bunch of stuff on Ohm and the "why" of his "law" since I once HAD to learn that at some instructor's insistence (he never did any design work himself, just "taught", but all had to comply in order to pass his course). In 50+ years NOBODY has asked me about the "why" of Ohm's Law of Resistance. That amounts to hundreds of knowledgeable folks. Ohm's law just IS. More radio-related is the equation for resonance. [frequency=1/(2 pi (L*C)^0.5), in units of Hertz, Henries, Farads] The "why" of that? I would have to research it, spend two weeks or so at that, all spinning my wheels on rote work that has NO intrinsic worth. I KNOW it works because I've proved it to myself over and over and over again in actual calculation, construction and test. It is one of those things that just IS. Memorize it, engrave it on the synapses, and go to work USING it. It is a reliable equation and works every time. "Ohm's Law" is a very, very simple equation using only three variables and not one single trans- cendental function. It's almost elementary algebra. To some licensed amateurs it might seem to be "rocket science." :-) How bad this is depends on how you perceive the goal of the exam, and what you expect a newly-licensed amateur radio operator to be able to do. The material in the US amateur radio test is up to the FCC to decide. The FCC grants the licenses, not the "amateur community." The FCC was never chartered to be an academic organization agency. From my observation, most of the folks "perceiving the goal of the exam" are usually working from a base line of their OWN knowledge and experience; i.e., expecting all to be "as good as they." :-) If you perceive the exam as a barrier to entry, it continues to accomplish that goal. It serves as an indication that the individual was willing to dedicate enough effort to memorize the questions so that they could pass the test. Oddly enough, this is exactly the same thing that the code requirement did, with about the same amount of useful remaining knowledge for most people. On the other hand, if you think that a newly-licensed amateur radio operator should actually know something about radio, that's simply not happening these days. They can tell you the very specific information that is covered on questions in the exam, but have no real knowledge of radio. Again, the function of the FCC is simply to regulate all US civil radio. The FCC grants the licenses and they have the task of deciding what is necessary for Their test. To save taxpayer dollars, the FCC created privatized testing via COLEMs and VECs. For US amateur radio the VEC create the questions and answers which are then approved/disproved by the FCC. By regulation the VEC are required to be already-licensed radio amateurs. Presumably those volunteer examiners know something about radio and the general knowledge base or background of those taking license tests. :-) It would seem more logic to steer the discussion onto the VEC Question Pool Committee rather than to blabber about What Should Be (or What Should Not). The VEC QPC determine the questions and answers and approval seems to be pro-forma with the FCC. What seems to be the case on that subject in here is merely Word War III on licensing and an ignition point for yet one more conflagration of the Angry Insistent (on Their way). In this sense, the testing and licensing mechanism has changed appropriately to match the current culture. Why should someone be required to learn radio theory if they are going to twirl the dial on a piece of commercial equipment? Rules and regulations, yes. But Ohm's law? Good question. :-) One such inhabitant of this Din of Inequity (K4YZ) once stated he "deserved an extra" because of his "ability to tune in a signal!" :-) In today's world, the number of people willing to expend that much effort on a hobby is vanishingly close to zero. I disagree with that considerably. The expenditure of anyone on their hobby is up to the individual hobbyist. Being aware of several hobbies done by folks I am acquainted with, such expenditure of personal time and effort varies and none of it is compensated for by anyone but the hobbyist. It's an old, trite phrase in here that "all must dedicate themselves and work hard" for an amateur radio license, any class. Again, I'll ask "why?" Who is going to compensate those ham radio hobbyists? Will they get cheers and bouquets from their fellow hobbyists for such "dedication?" I think not. At best they would get a few words of approval if in person. In here they would receive yet-another flame war trigger of antagonistic comment, of allegedly "not doing as good" as the flamer. This "dedication" thing seems to be an imaginary construct existing in different forms in each individual. Amateur radio is a hobby. It isn't a craft, a guild, a union, or any occupation thing. The hobby is NOT necessary for the survival of the nation nor one whose primary concern is public safety. [like all citizen organizations, they CAN be of aid in emergencies but that is NOT a prerequisite in the amateur radio regulations] Does everyone have to be "dedicated" to something? Or can't they just go and enjoy the hobby without meeting someone else's idea of "standards?" There are exactly two choices -- change the requirements to enter the hobby, or watch the hobby die. The requirements were changed. I differ on that. Requirements EVOLVE as I see them. They evolve to fit many, many things but, foremost, I think is that they should fit the present-day and the immediate future. There was nothing in the Communications Act of 1934 nor the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that mandated amateur radio to preserve and protect the old ways of amateur radio. Nothing about preservation of "tradition." The agency granting all amateur radio licenses in the US exists solely to regulate all US civil radio...it is NOT a "club," NOT some agency beholden to anyone specific or any organization. The FCC should be responsive to ALL US citizens, on ANY radio service it regulates. For the most part I think they are just that. The FCC and its ham radio license testing doesn't exist to provide emotional sustenance to the olde-tyme ham radio lifestylers who wish to preserve the environment as it was when they were first licensed. That's not evolution, just stagnation in favor of a small minority. That is FAR from "serving the nation," just ordinary selfishness. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
So who won the "when does NoCode happen" pool? | Policy | |||
another place the fruit can't post | Policy | |||
LAPD getting rid of "Code 2-High" calls on 5/16 | Scanner | |||
Why You Don't Like The ARRL | General | |||
NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement. | Policy |