wrote:

... "Trivial Pursuit" ...

Excellent analogy, and demonstrates my point to a 'T'.

Perhaps, but that's not the big issue.

What I see as the big issue is that such testing may actually
do a disservice to the amateurs themselves, because they wind
up with a license but not the basic knowledge on how to set
up a station and operate it.

Because that wouldn't help the situation at all - at least
not in the above example.

I disagree.


First off, a regulations question is essentially a
memorization question.

Yes. I've stated before that certain types of questions -- i.e. definitions,
regulations, etc. -- tend to be more rote memorization. However, there is no
reason why those examination questions cannot likewise be randomized to some
extent.


Second, if the exact questions are publicly available,
figuring out the correct answer is pretty easy. Then all the
person has to do is "memorize" the correct answer enough to
recognize it. Changing the distractors doesn't make any
difference.

However, my proposal has been to randomize the correct answers (as much as
possible). Granted, my choice of question was not ideal. Rather than using a
range, use a specific frequency and 3 distractors, requiring the applicant
to choose the correct frequency (hence, knowing band limits, etc.)


Where such an approach would have an effect would be in
questions like Ohm's Law, where the values could be randomly
generated.

Yes. Some questions naturally lend themselves to randomization then others.

In some respects, I think definition questions, such as "what is ohm's law"
simply be eliminated. Either the person knows what ohms law is (via a test
question where they have to use it to solve a problem) or they do not.
Having the definition as a test question is silly.


Maybe not. I think that, in the long run, it is actually
easier to learn the material. It's the short run that is the
problem.

I'm not really sure of this.


In practice, however, not much can be done other than to
enlarge the question pools and possibly have computer
randomization of values. The FCC is clearly
not going to take over the testing jobs that have been done
by unpaid volunteers for more than 20 years.

I think writing a computer program to generate examinations, and releasing
the examination to the public so folks could generate their own tests in
prep for taking the "real thing", would, in fact, be a 'good thing'. Heck,
I'm sure W5YI would love to charge prospective hams $25 for the "actual
program used to generate your FCC Examination!"

Plus, it eliminates the need for the VECs to constantly maintain a pool of
questions -- less long-term work. With randomization, they have a near
inifinite pool of questions, all generated at the time a test is needed.

73
KH6HZ