It's just that the direction of where people are becoming educated etc. has
changed. That is all it is.....



--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...


Ah, the dumbed-down culture myth again. People today are not as dumb as
you'd like to think they are, Larry. And they're certainly no dumber than
some of those in our generation or in previous generations.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

Dwight Stewart wrote in part:



I shouldn't have to go back and point to some of the crazy things people
watched and did in years past. Remember the Village People,

There was no ham radio operator character in the Village People. Glaring
oversight.

Kiss,

Upon further review, Kiss rocked sufficiently.

Disco,

On the one hand, there is a special dung heap in the low-rent section of
West Hell reserved for disco. On the other hand, only one thing is more
pathetic than an aging hippie, and that's an aging punk. Guilty.

the
song Muskrat Love,

Which version: the shambling and unspeakable America original, or the
eldritch horror cover by The Captain and Tennille?

houses filled with incense, chopper motorcycles, the song
My Ding-a-Ling, Elton John's sunglasses, and so on.


Elton John's glasses were actually PHR4CKT4L 4NT3NN4Z. I'm surprised you
don't remember this.

--

It Came From C. L. Smith's Unclaimed Mysteries.
http://www.unclaimedmysteries.net

Dwight Stewart wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote:

some snippage


BUT! the individual tests can be "smartened" or
"dumbed". All that is up to us. We decide.

But we have to decide within the constraints of the intent of those tests.
To do that, we have to understand that intent. Far too many try to view the
Ham Radio license exams as some sort of knowledge exam, when they are
instead entrance exams into Ham Radio.

I won't disagree with your basic premise, but therin lies danger.



And Ham Radio is a recreation, not a
vocation.

And there is the trap! There are many recreations that require some
learning to effectively use and enjoy them. Fishing and boating come to
mind. I have a boat. I never took a test for its use, although I got a
little pamphlet when I got my license. Whenever I bought a fishing
license, I got another little pamphlet explaining seasons and creel
limits, which are pretty darn analogous to band edges and power limits.
But no tests.


The FCC has other exams designed to examine vocational knowledge,
as do local colleges and universities. Given those facts, I see no reason to
change the existing written exams.

Just be on guard, because others do.


- Mike KB3EIA -

"Unclaimed Mysteries" wrote:

There was no ham radio operator character
in the Village People. Glaring oversight.


LOL. Maybe the Ham Radio was at the WMCA. Anyway, I think you get the
point I was trying to make.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Mike Coslo" wrote:

And there is the trap! There are many recreations
that require some learning to effectively use and
enjoy them. Fishing and boating come to mind. I
have a boat. I never took a test for its use,
although I got a little pamphlet when I got my
license. (snip)


The difference lies in the use of that recreation. As you know, Ham Radio
also serves a purpose outside pure recreation (emergency service, for
example). Therefore, the FCC took a more proactive approach, but one that is
not that different from other recreations with a more serious side.

Lets take your boat as an example. For pure recreation, you obviously do
not need a license or operating exam. However, if you join an organization
like the CG Auxiliary with the intent to use that boat for a more serious
purpose, you are expected to take courses, pass exams, and maintain the boat
to certain standards. The same is true for CAP and other similar mainly
recreational activities with a serious side.

Do you follow what I'm saying here? I'm trying to simplify things, while
still getting across the point.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 00:54:10 GMT, Steve Stone wrote:

A recent New York State Math Regents exam results were tossed out
because so few students were able to pass the test. Passing the test
is required for High School graduation. During pre exam trials of the
questions it was found that only 47 percent of those who took the exam
could pass the test.

I am a survivor of the New York State Regents' Exams 50+ years ago.
It was a joke, because the last semester of each subject was
devoted to reviewing past Regents' exams and therefore we learned
zippo new during that time except how to pass the exam. And this was
in a high school for nerds.....

So what does this have to do with CW testing ? Absolutely nothing
except for stupidity.

Or lousy teaching. I suspect the latter. Kids aren't all born
dumb - most get that way because they're not taught otherwise.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 23:14:02 GMT, Dwight Stewart wrote:

The Amateur Radio Service does not exist, nor has it ever existed, in a
vacuum. At least two of our reasons for existing (pool of trained operators
and emergency service) lies with those other radio services - radio services
outside Ham Radio. Therefore, our rules and regulations must reflect the
needs of those other radio services. At one time, those needs included code.
That is no longer true. Code testing was once needed. That is no longer
true.

At one time (admittedly in ancient times) the Navy station that you
were interfering with could/would come onto your frequency and order
you in Morse Code to QRT, so knowledge/proficiency/skill (whichever)
in Morse was essential.

This, too, is no longer the case.

It's no myth, Dwight. Our culture has been
stagnated by 50 years of liberal propaganda in
the high schools and universities, the constant
whining of the liberal media, and the "mainstreaming"
of any kind of perversion known to man in the name
of "enlightenment." Sorry, but I have to call it
like I see it. It's a dumbed-down culture, pure
and simple.


Larry, it's spelled "dumb-downed" or "dumb downed." And, while I
agree with some of your points about the education system, I'm not
willing to make blanket statements about an entire culture.

That's OK...anything that is progressive or modern (called "liberal
propaganda" or "whining of the liberal media") or is just plain
different (called "any kind of perversion known to man in the name
of enlightenment") processed through Larry comes out as the cause of
all of society's ills including falling arches, low bit rates,
foreign QRM, garblem CW, warts, and incessent rain.

I've learned to tune it out as a sign of ignorance at the mildest
and bigotry at the worst and get on with my worthwhile, enjoyable,
and very moral "liberal" life.

Most schools and universities today are either state owned or state
supported. Therefore, to find an answer to the problems with schools, we
only have to look as far as our own state representatives. And, since they
like the federal education assistance available to them, those
representatives are not going to change unless we vote them out and are
willing to fund schools locally. I see no effort in either of those
directions.

A bloody shame both ways - the Feds play their games, the locals
play theirs, and the kids - including my kids in their time - lose
out. Private schools were no better......they just had different
funding ills.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

ospam (Larry Roll K3LT) wrote in message ...


So, Brian -- are you going to defend your statement, or not?

73 de Larry, K3LT

Yes. No. What statement did I make?

Dwight Stewart wrote:
"Phil Kane" wrote:


A bloody shame both ways - the Feds play
their games, the locals play theirs, and
the kids - including my kids in their
time - lose out. Private schools were no
better......they just had different
funding ills.



I noticed you mentioned teachers in another message. If you get a chance,
take a trip to your local school sometime. I recently visited several high
schools and was impressed with the effort those teachers were putting into
their jobs. What was surprising was the behavior of the kids in some classes
(not all, some). In some classes, very few were paying attention to anything
the teacher said. Instead, they were talking, playing radios, dancing,
threatening each other, sleeping, making out (kissing and necking), and so
on. They would have never even noticed anything the teacher did to help them
learn. I don't see how anyone could possibly learn anything in such an
environment.

I talked to several teachers afterwards. According to them, the difference
between classes is due to attempts to separate kids that are making an
effort from those who are not. In the classes with the better behaved
students, the classroom instruction advances at a much quicker rate. In the
classes with the kids who are not trying, class size is reduced and the
teachers just try to get the kids to absorb anything they're supposed to be
learning. Most of those teachers admitted it was nearly a hopeless cause -
how do you get kids to learn if they're not at all interested in doing so.

I left with a simply question on my mind - what is causing those kids not
to be interested in learning and how can that be changed. If we can answer
that, I think 80 to 90 percent of the problem could be solved. And, as
mentioned in another message, I suspect the answer lies outside the school
system.

My take is that the child has to be raised with an expectation that he
or she will indeed do well in school. Many are not raised this way.
Appreciation for the sciences, appreciation for learning and hard work,
all that good stuff.

Diminishing emphasis on "self-esteem" would be a great idea.
Self-esteem should be something earned. One of the strangest things I
have seen lately is the bizzare students who have a great sense of
self-esteem with absolutely no reason for it. No accomplishments, no
education, nothing but feeling really, really good about themselves.

We also have to remember that Students are individuals and mature at
different rates. I know many students who seemd to undergo a miraculous
change at some point in high school, going from slacker to achiever
almost overnight. My own kid underwent such a change right after he got
a steady girlfriend, his grades improved, and his whole H.S. experience
changed right around, because he started to get a future looking
perspective.

Oh, yeah. Get the kids thinking about something other than what's
happening 5 minutes from now.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Dwight Stewart
writes:

It's no myth, Dwight. Our culture has been
stagnated by 50 years of liberal propaganda in
the high schools and universities, the constant
whining of the liberal media, and the "mainstreaming"
of any kind of perversion known to man in the name
of "enlightenment." Sorry, but I have to call it
like I see it. It's a dumbed-down culture, pure
and simple.


Larry, it's spelled "dumb-downed" or "dumb downed."

Dwight:

In your haste to correct me, you got it wrong both times. It is, in fact,
"dumbed-down."

And, while I agree
with some of your points about the education system, I'm not willing to make
blanket statements about an entire culture.

That's OK, at least one of us is willing to do so.

Most schools and universities today are either state owned or state
supported. Therefore, to find an answer to the problems with schools, we
only have to look as far as our own state representatives. And, since they
like the federal education assistance available to them, those
representatives are not going to change unless we vote them out and are
willing to fund schools locally. I see no effort in either of those
directions.

Sad, but true.

73 de Larry, K3LT