"Mike Coslo" wrote:

Some people can't help that though. In the end, the difference is
not all that much. Memorizing a formula and knowing where to look
it up and use it is a functional equivalent. I wouldn't be caught
dead without my ARRL handbook.

Yes, but what about those who simply word associate the answers and never
bother to learn the underlying theory at all? Are they really a benefit to
the ARS, other than upping the "body count".


I don't disagree with you there. I'm all about technical acumen. I
just don't think all hams need to be as technically clever as I am,
as some hams do.

I believe the theory examinations should be structured to test people on
basic knowledge and skills -- the building blocks they use to further their
journey in ham radio. I do not feel it is unreasonable to expect folks who
get licensed to actually 'know' these things.


It couldn't, for the many things that we can engage in with this
hobby. I doubt we would get many people into the hobby if we had to
test to proficiency in all the aspects of it.

70% isn't necessarily "proficient". I would say 70% is adequate for passing
the test. I would be hard pressed, for instance, to say an employee who gets
70% of their work correct is proficient at their job.

73
KH6HZ