"John Smith I" wrote:


However, those making false claims as to CW's viability, and relevancy
still attempt to justify past practices of using it as a barrier to new
licensees, they eventually will give up this insanity as they find this
has lost them all their credibility.

CW's relevancy and viability, and its continued usage as a skills test in
the ARS, are two separate issues as I see it.

I see CW, still, as a very viable and very relevant mode of operation in the
ARS. The last time I recall somewhere around 50% of hams polled indicate
they use CW. That makes it very relevant to the ARS today.

Now, whether or not it should remain a test element is a different argument
altogether. For a very long time, I have been a proponent of eliminating the
code test, and instead strengthening the written examinations.

Others have suggested retaining CW as a skills test, and while I understand
that line of thought, I disagree with it today. I'm not sure there is one
'skills' test for the ARS which is really suitable.

Instead, I would rather see us focus on simply ensuring that people who
become licensed actually have a solid grasp of the knowledge we ask them to
learn as part of the licensing process. I see the current structure of the
theory examinations as simply not doing this. When you can "pass" the
licensing exam yet get every single question on rules and regulations
wrong -- that says something is seriously broken.


Well, as people become more and more educated on the whole, all of
education just seems easier. When you basic understanding out of high
school these days equals the education you only used to get from jr.
colleges in past years, that happens.

Perhaps, but this is simply not the case today.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Dec6.html

From my daily interaction with recent US high school graduates, I can
definitely see that the vast majority are lacking basic math and english
skills, compared to their foreign counterparts. Virtually all the US-based
students I work with need some form of remedial or "basic" english and math
classes, whereas their foreign counterparts are beyond the "entry level"
freshman math and science classes from the get-go.

KH6HZ wrote:

CW's relevancy and viability, and its continued usage as a skills test in
the ARS, are two separate issues as I see it.

People who "see it differently" may see the tooth fairy or aliens, no
problems, they have medications for that nowadays.

I see CW, still, as a very viable and very relevant mode of operation in the
ARS. The last time I recall somewhere around 50% of hams polled indicate
they use CW. That makes it very relevant to the ARS today.

Well, keep watching ...

Now, whether or not it should remain a test element is a different argument
altogether. For a very long time, I have been a proponent of eliminating the
code test, and instead strengthening the written examinations.

The written exams need to be relevant and justifiable, that is all ...

Others have suggested retaining CW as a skills test, and while I understand
that line of thought, I disagree with it today. I'm not sure there is one
'skills' test for the ARS which is really suitable.

Some have claimed they have seen aliens, I remain skeptical ...


Instead, I would rather see us focus on simply ensuring that people who
become licensed actually have a solid grasp of the knowledge we ask them to
learn as part of the licensing process. I see the current structure of the
theory examinations as simply not doing this. When you can "pass" the
licensing exam yet get every single question on rules and regulations
wrong -- that says something is seriously broken.

They need to know allowable power levels for band/freqs which are in
use. They need to know the freqs they are allowed to use. It would be
nice if they knew how to construct transistor gear (tubes are obsolete
and irrelevant.) However, the construction they can pick up later ...
if so interested ...

From my daily interaction with recent US high school graduates, I can
definitely see that the vast majority are lacking basic math and english
skills, compared to their foreign counterparts. Virtually all the US-based
students I work with need some form of remedial or "basic" english and math
classes, whereas their foreign counterparts are beyond the "entry level"
freshman math and science classes from the get-go.

Well, look at just the general population, only about 3 in 100 are
intelligent enough to be bothered with. Always has been so, and will be
so long into the future. This is nothing new ... you see a prime
example of it right here in this news group ...

Some just don't get it and never will ...

JS
--
http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com