"No Diagrams Or Symbols"...
Check This Out:
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/12/03/1/?nc=1 Note this: "The General class question pool does not contain any diagrams or symbols." Hans' proposal sounds better and better... 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"N2EY" wrote
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/12/03/1/?nc=1 Note this: "The General class question pool does not contain any diagrams or symbols." NTI (No Theory International) at work in the background. If this is a surprise to anyone, you only need examine the 'gang of four' who is responsible for the question pools. This has the fingerprints of W5YI smeared all over it. He has stated publicly that he feels that since people who acquire entry level ham tickets invariably purchase their equipment assembled these days, and send them in for repairs when broken, they no longer need to possess theknowledge needed to build their own stations, nor the knowledge to determine if their repairs/adjustments result in proper on-the-air signals. Because of this fact, he thinks that the majority of questions regarding math and theory (knowledge mainly needed to build/repair/adjust equipment) should be removed from qualification tests, and simply replaced with questions on operating technique and regulations. If he had his way, math and theory questions would only be part of Amateur Extra examinations. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
"N2EY" wrote Note this: "The General class question pool does not contain any diagrams or symbols." Breaking news..... ......a member of the QPC informs me thusly.... "I'm sure QPC Chairman W4WW will chime in on this, but just be aware that the committee has been continuing the posture established in 1987 by FCC that the General pool has no graphics. ...... So, as with all General pools since 1987, this one again has no graphics." |
"KØHB" wrote in message link.net...
"N2EY" wrote http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/12/03/1/?nc=1 Note this: "The General class question pool does not contain any diagrams or symbols." NTI (No Theory International) at work in the background. Incrementalism, too. If this is a surprise to anyone, you only need examine the 'gang of four' who is responsible for the question pools. This has the fingerprints of W5YI smeared all over it. He has stated publicly that he feels that since people who acquire entry level ham tickets invariably purchase their equipment assembled these days, and send them in for repairs when broken, they no longer need to possess theknowledge needed to build their own stations, nor the knowledge to determine if their repairs/adjustments result in proper on-the-air signals. But the General isn't an entry-level license. And people say there's no dumbing-down going on. Because of this fact, he thinks that the majority of questions regarding math and theory (knowledge mainly needed to build/repair/adjust equipment) should be removed from qualification tests, and simply replaced with questions on operating technique and regulations. The current study manual has at least two pages on how to adjust VOX and anti-VOX. Betcha it doesn't have diddly-squat about how to adjust a bug... If he had his way, math and theory questions would only be part of Amateur Extra examinations. "Don't bother...they're here..." 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"N2EY" wrote And people say there's no dumbing-down going on. As I noted in another post, Jim, this turns out to be old news. There haven't been diagrams on the General examination for the past 15 years. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
"KØHB" wrote:
This has the fingerprints of W5YI smeared all over it. He has stated publicly that he feels that since people who acquire entry level ham tickets invariably purchase their equipment assembled these days, and send them in for repairs when broken, they no longer need to possess theknowledge needed to build their own stations, nor the knowledge to determine if their repairs/adjustments result in proper on-the-air signals. (snip) While I cannot speak for someone else, I would reword that to say that simple diagrams and a few questions in a license test is not going to prepare someone to build or repair the complex radio equipment used by most Amateurs today. To build such equipment, one would almost need an engineering degree and a labortory full of equipment. Anything beyond the most basic repairs would require considerable experience and a significant investment in equipment. So, in my opinion, instead of trying to meet that, the tests today serve as a basic introduction to electronics to both allow those basic repairs and encourage some to seek real electronics training elsewhere. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
the tests today serve as a basic introduction to electronics to both allow
those basic repairs and encourage some to seek real electronics training elsewhere. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ BS, the test today do nothing of the sort, all these stupid test do anymore is test someones ability to Memorize a Bunch of Q and As. |
"Dwight Stewart" wrote So, in my opinion, instead of trying to meet that, the tests today serve as a basic introduction to electronics to both allow those basic repairs and encourage some to seek real electronics training elsewhere. I'd agree with that in general principle. But it strikes me that the ability to recognize the symbols for various electronic components in a simple schmatic and to be able to navigate an elementary block diagram would be essential to even the most elementary troubleshooting and repair tasks that we'd expect a General class amateur to be able to accomplish. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
"KØHB" wrote:
I'd agree with that in general principle. But it strikes me that the ability to recognize the symbols for various electronic components in a simple schmatic and to be able to navigate an elementary block diagram would be essential to even the most elementary troubleshooting and repair tasks that we'd expect a General class amateur to be able to accomplish. How many symbols are there now, Hans? A hundred or more? How much can we include in the license tests before they become massive in size and overwhelming in nature? We have to draw a line somewhere on what to include and I'm satisfied with where that line is drawn now. By the way, the Technician question pool I studied (July 97 ~ June 01 pool) did include some simple block diagrams (transmitter and receiver), basic symbols (resisters, capacitors, and so on), and even a couple of simple schematics. One certainly couldn't build anything with that, but it was a good introduction. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
"Dwight Stewart" wrote How many symbols are there now, Hans? A hundred or more? How much can we include in the license tests before they become massive in size and overwhelming in nature? I wouldn't venture a guess off the top of my head how many symbols there are, but I'm not suggesting hundreds of questions on the test devoted to this. Ten or 15 questions in the pool, with maybe a couple actually in any given exam. Would that be too much for you to memorize ..... er, I mean learn? 73, de Hans, K0HB |
That is the handy work of the likes of NCI, ARRL, and W5YI. The new test is
a joke. This is also why I e-mailed the ARRL VEC and told him to remove me from the VE list. It's truly a sad thing to see a great hobby like Amateur Radio degraded to what it is today. :'-( 72, 73 Dan, N8IE "N2EY" wrote in message ... Check This Out: http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/12/03/1/?nc=1 Note this: "The General class question pool does not contain any diagrams or symbols." Hans' proposal sounds better and better... 73 de Jim, N2EY --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.542 / Virus Database: 336 - Release Date: 11/18/2003 |
That is the handy work of the likes of NCI, ARRL, and W5YI. The new test is
a joke. Its what I have been saying all along. And the sad thing is its going to get worse. WELCOME TO THE NEW CBHAM SERVICE |
"KØHB" wrote in message link.net...
"N2EY" wrote http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/12/03/1/?nc=1 Note this: "The General class question pool does not contain any diagrams or symbols." NTI (No Theory International) at work in the background. If this is a surprise to anyone, you only need examine the 'gang of four' who is responsible for the question pools. This has the fingerprints of W5YI smeared all over it. He has stated publicly that he feels that since people who acquire entry level ham tickets invariably purchase their equipment assembled these days, and send them in for repairs when broken, they no longer need to possess theknowledge needed to build their own stations, nor the knowledge to determine if their repairs/adjustments result in proper on-the-air signals. Because of this fact, he thinks that the majority of questions regarding math and theory (knowledge mainly needed to build/repair/adjust equipment) should be removed from qualification tests, and simply replaced with questions on operating technique and regulations. If he had his way, math and theory questions would only be part of Amateur Extra examinations. 73, de Hans, K0HB Take note that that is the situation here in Canada. When things were restructured back in 1990, not only was the code test separated out, but the written test became simpler. And that test did not allow for the building of transmitters. You had to take the advanced test to do that. I have no idea if that idea came from hams or the DOC. Certainly there was the suggestion that since few were building, the test did not need to deal too much with technical stuff. Of course, the simpler test, and more important the rule that outright bans a homemade transmitter's use with that Basic license, institutionalizes the concept that it's a hobby of communication, not technical matters. When I was licensed in 1972, it was still called the "Amateur Experimental Service" here in Canada. Michael VE2BVW |
"KØHB" wrote:
I wouldn't venture a guess off the top of my head how many symbols there are, but I'm not suggesting hundreds of questions on the test devoted to this. Ten or 15 questions in the pool, with maybe a couple actually in any given exam. Would that be too much for you to memorize ..... er, I mean learn? No, smart aleck. As I said in the last message, which you edited out of your quote, the Technician question pool I studied (July 97 ~ June 01 pool) covered simple block diagrams, symbols, and schematics. I suspect the current question pool does too. So perhaps you should make an effort to actually see what is on the current pools and exams before talking about what you want to see added. If you did so, perhaps you wouldn't be blathering about adding what is already there. Or is all that too much for you to understand? Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
Michael Black wrote:
Take note that that is the situation here in Canada. When things were restructured back in 1990, not only was the code test separated out, but the written test became simpler. And that test did not allow for the building of transmitters. You had to take the advanced test to do that. I have no idea if that idea came from hams or the DOC. Certainly there was the suggestion that since few were building, the test did not need to deal too much with technical stuff. Of course, the simpler test, and more important the rule that outright bans a homemade transmitter's use with that Basic license, institutionalizes the concept that it's a hobby of communication, not technical matters. When I was licensed in 1972, it was still called the "Amateur Experimental Service" here in Canada. Michael VE2BVW I seem to recall seeing a notice on either the RAC's or IC's websites that they would be removing the code requirement for anything lower than 6m. Do you know anything about that? It almost seems like a priviledge to get onto the low frequency bands with the 5wpm requirements. On another note, do you know of any good morse resources? I'd like to learn Morse (I got my license in 1999 and didn't take the morse test). As far as the test goes, I took Electronics Engineering Technology in college and I thought the advanced exam was quite easy, but I may be biased. -- Donovan Hill VA7LNX (Basic, Advanced) |
"WA8ULX" wrote BS, the test today do nothing of the sort, all these stupid test do anymore is test someones ability to Memorize a Bunch of Q and As. I have realised that it's actually possible to know _less_ than nothing about a subject - I am talking about people who deal with electronics at the level of superstition. Give these people a goat and they wouldn't know what to do with it. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:38 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com