Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dee D. Flint" wrote: (snip) As some have commented, right now it is quite possible to miss the majority of the regulatory questions on an exam yet still pass the exam. (snip Theoretically possible, but not really very likely. A person that poorly prepared would likely miss several other questions on the exam, meaning he or she would almost have to get the majority correct on each part of the exam to pass the overall exam. That is one of the strengths of this type of exam. The exams for the various classes could then focus on operating procedures and technical elements. (snip) What about the rules specific to each license class (VE rules, for example)? Also, some important rules are reenforced by repeating them at least one more time in another exam. How would you handle that? For example, let's call the rules test Element R and then for the various licenses we could have a system as follows: (snip) The rules are already in the current Technician exam and reenforced in the General (and a few even reenforced in the Extra). A single exam for the rules would eliminate that system of reenforcement. Also, there are about 100 questions in the current written exams, from a pool of about 600 questions. Beyond the rules, how would you break those questions down for each element? Finally, I have to wonder if there is any reason to change the exams at all. The current exams have evolved over many years, and I just don't see how the suggested changes I've seen (yours and others) offer a real improvement. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|