Robert Casey wrote:

I still think that the Technician license is fine as an entry-level
license and that the Technician exam isn't terribly hard - just an
extended version of the old Novice exam.

The Tech exam is what, roughly equivalent to an honors level high school
physics exam and history exam (I mention "history' as that requires memorizing
random information, names and dates equivalent to frequency bands and such
rules).
I assume you are being very facetious?

Not
the inner city non-honors public schools where if you can write your
name you graduate)... The Extra exam might be roughly equivalent to an exam for
a 3 credit college class.

Possibly - though it depends on the class! 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

Robert Casey wrote:

:

If the existing Technicians are upgraded to General, this means
that after we do this, we are discriminating against all that come
afterward. There will be a *powerful* argument that "The Tech elements
were good enough for the majority of hams to become General, so why
should I have to take a harder test?"

And although there is really no test process needed at all to get
on HF (witness CB'ers that run illegal power levels)


Well, they're not *legal* and should not be there. And legal CB
operators are not supposed to talk internationally.


Sure, but if you make it legal, is there any reason to require any test
at all?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Bill Sohl wrote:

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Indeed, if we support the lowered power limits, and all, is there a
good argument for simply letting Novices on the air with no
requirements? Learn as they go?

- Mike KB3EIA -

If the new "Novice" or "Communicator" proposals get instituted, I will

tell

any beginning class that I teach that we are going to go all the way to
General. It won't be worth my time to teach otherwise.


Do you really believe that bringing in a new ham at the
proposed novice level isn't worth it?

If the tests are going to be geared to "an average sixth grader", and
one of the requirements is to sign a paper stating that you have read
part 97, exactly what is the class going to consist of? And since ther
is a good possibility that the General test is going to end up being at
the level of the Technician license.

I know I'm mixing proposals there, but the point is, maybe the new
novice or communicator should be easy enough that people *don't* have to
take any classes for it.


My goal or objective would be to encourage
as many new people, especially kids, to get a novice license
and just see how it goes from there.

Sure, I will work with whatever we have. That doesn't mean that I have
to like it tho'

- Mike KB3EIA -

Bill Sohl wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Jason Hsu wrote:

The ARRL and the new NCVEC petitions call for creating a new Novice
class and upgrading Technicians to General. (I already commented on
the ARRL petition to the FCC.)

I'm not upset with the ARRL about this. The directors did what they
felt they had to do. But I'm still puzzled by parts of the proposal.

The highly controversial proposal of upgrading Technicians to General
is the result of insisting that all license classes be merged into
just 3 without downgrading privileges for any class. It's a game of
License Class Survivor, and all classes but 3 have to be voted off the
island. General and Amateur Extra are (correctly) considered too
important to eliminate, and Advanced licenses get upgraded to Amateur
Extra. So only one more license class can remain, and the ARRL and
NCVEC think that the Novice should remain and be reopened, and the
Technician license should be voted off the island. Because of the "no
downgrade" condition, Technician licenses are upgraded to General.

Interesting take on the issue, Jason.

My main concern is that there is a precedent in the proposed mass upgrade:

If the existing Technicians are upgraded to General, this means that
after we do this, we are discriminating against all that come afterward.


Mike, that is absolutely false as an argument of any substance.
Government has given temporary waivers in many areas and no one
has ever been able to say that after the door closed on a particular
waiver, they should be allowed a similar waiver afterwards.

Is it fair to those that come afterward?


There will be a *powerful* argument that "The Tech elements were good
enough for the majority of hams to become General, so why should I have
to take a harder test?"


They can argue that until hell freezes over and it won't stand up in
any court. A one time "free pass" based on a legitamate FCC goal
of license and rules simplification is ample justification.


Bill, just the same as we (you) are on the verge of eliminating Element
one as the great barrier to the Amateur radio service, we can change the
entrance requirements.

And who needs to argue that in any court? We simply do it the same way
that you support upgrading Techs to Generals. The same way that we make
a new "communicator license, and have people sign affidavits that they
have read part 97


And although there is really no test process needed at all to get on HF
(witness CB'ers that run illegal power levels) I believe that we should
foster technical knowledge qualifications for the ARS.


No argument there...BUT the process still needs a solution and the
hodgepodge of 6 licenses and 6 sets of rules today just isn't needed.
That is why both ARRL and NCVEC have proposed almost identical
3 license plans with the "free" upgrades.


Is the No-Code Technician license THAT hard to get? During the years
when both the Novice and No-Code Technician licenses were available
for new hams, the new hams (including myself) overwhelmingly chose the
No-Code Technician.

Not difficult at all. Many people have taken and passed the test. I
can't think of any good arguments for reducing it.


Think of a very basic entry level that more than just extraordinary
bright kids can take and pass.

I could have passed the Technician exam in 7th grade, and there are
plenty enough people that think I'm as dumb as mud. I wasn't an
exceptional student or even close.


What's now the Technician exam was two separate
tests back then - Novice and Technician. Both the Novice and
Technician licenses required passing the Novice exam plus one more
exam. For the Novice license, the 5 wpm Morse Code exam was the
additional exam. For the No-Code Technician license, the Technician
exam was the additional exam. By at least a 20:1 or 30:1 margin, the
new hams chose the No-Code Technician exam. The new hams (including
myself) clearly thought that preparing the Technician exam was MUCH
easier than preparing for the 5 wpm exam. But in spite of this, the
ARRL thinks that the current Technician exam (a merger of the old
Novice and Technician exams) is too hard but says that the 5 wpm exam
is quite easy and uses this view as a partial justification as keeping
the 5 wpm exam requirement for the Amateur Extra license.

5WPM is easy for some, and not at all easy for others.


Agreed.


The record is clear. The No-Code Technician license made the Novice
license obsolete. In the 2000 restructuring, the FCC closed the
Novice class for the same reason GM closed Oldsmobile - not enough
takers to justify the administrative costs and labor required.

Given all this, is it SO necessary to bring back the Novice class at
the expense of the Technician class? Why didn't the ARRL propose a
4-class system so that the popular Technician class could be kept?

My theories on why the ARRL thinks the Novice license is more
important than the Technician license:
1. The ARRL directors couldn't agree, so they proposed a compromise
that they felt would promote good PR. I don't think they seriously
expect the FCC to approve it.
2. Nostalgia about their Novice days led them to want to reopen and
reintroduce the Novice class.

That is a pretty good assessment, Jason.


I have already disagreed and said so in a different email.
I would especially doubt the ARRL expects a non-approval from
the FCC. The ARRL has a long standing positive relationship
with most, if not all, those in the FCC that will be assessing the
petitions. If there's any doubt in ARRL's mind, it is (IMHO)
likly tied to doubt that any code test will remain as opposed to
even having only a 5wpm test for Extra.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK


- Mike KB3EIA -

Dee D. Flint wrote:

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Indeed, if we support the lowered power limits, and all, is there a
good argument for simply letting Novices on the air with no
requirements? Learn as they go?

- Mike KB3EIA -

If the new "Novice" or "Communicator" proposals get instituted, I will

tell

any beginning class that I teach that we are going to go all the way to
General. It won't be worth my time to teach otherwise.

Do you really believe that bringing in a new ham at the
proposed novice level isn't worth it?

My goal or objective would be to encourage
as many new people, especially kids, to get a novice license
and just see how it goes from there.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK


It is worthwhile to encourage them to become a ham yes and I will do so.
But from the discussion of what is proposed to be on the "new novice" or
communicator tests, a one evening two hour session will do to cover the
material in more depth than they will need. I'm not going to set up a
single session one hour class. It's too much hassle to get a room, books,
etc for that. I would willingly tutor individuals at my home for that
license for a few hours but will not run a class for it. I'd set up the
class so the first week, we discuss that study guide which they will have
been asked to read in advance. We will discuss any questions that they may
have on it. The remaining class weeks would cover the material to go on to
General.

I want to bring new hams into the hobby but I'm simply not going to spend my
time teaching material that simple. Nothing against the people or even
really against the material. I simply expect a better return on my
investment of time. I will not get that teaching material aimed at the
elementary school level when I am teaching adults. To me the satisfaction
comes in seeing their faces light up when we've conquered a difficult
chapter.

There you go, Dee! Not every one wants to be an elementary school
teacher, and not everyone wants to teach adults very simple things. How
long does it take people to learn how to sign a statement that they have
read part 97? I question whether a class will be needed for the new
licenses anyhow.



- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...
[snip]
Whatever entry level license is proposed or is established should be
achievable by teenagers who are able to do fairly well in school. You
don't have to be a genius honor roll student to get it, but you should have
more smarts than Beavis and Butthead can muster....

This means that all the tests need to be harder as ordinary youths even
below the teen age level regularly pass the Technician and General class
exams. With a little extra elmering, some pass the Extra exam.

Yes, even SEVEN YEAR OLDS to extra. :-)

Yeah, lots of "elmering." Suuure.

LHA / WMD

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

I still think that the Technician license is fine as an entry-level
license and that the Technician exam isn't terribly hard - just an
extended version of the old Novice exam.

The Tech exam is what, roughly equivalent to an honors level high school
physics
exam and history exam (I mention "history' as that requires memorizing random
information, names and dates equivalent to frequency bands and such rules).
Not
the inner city non-honors public schools where if you can write your name you
graduate)... The Extra exam might be roughly equivalent to an exam for a 3
credit
college class.

Hardly.

NONE of the US amateur license examinations are any sort
of academic achievement diplomas or certifications. The FCC
was never chartered to be any academic organization.

Of course, if you want to believe in the fantasy that an extra
doing 20+ wpm morse is an "expert radio operator" in this
new millennium, that's your thing. Would have been fine in
the 1930s. Not now.

If you want to start an "electro magnet school," fine. It worked
for Gordon West.

LHA / WMD

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Indeed, if we support the lowered power limits, and all, is there a
good argument for simply letting Novices on the air with no
requirements? Learn as they go?

- Mike KB3EIA -

If the new "Novice" or "Communicator" proposals get instituted, I will
tell
any beginning class that I teach that we are going to go all the way
to
General. It won't be worth my time to teach otherwise.

Do you really believe that bringing in a new ham at the
proposed novice level isn't worth it?

My goal or objective would be to encourage
as many new people, especially kids, to get a novice license
and just see how it goes from there.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

It is worthwhile to encourage them to become a ham yes and I will do so.
But from the discussion of what is proposed to be on the "new novice" or
communicator tests, a one evening two hour session will do to cover the
material in more depth than they will need. I'm not going to set up a
single session one hour class.

That's certainly your call...but I think it is shortsighted.

It's too much hassle to get a room, books,
etc for that. I would willingly tutor individuals at my home for that
license for a few hours but will not run a class for it.

Personally I'd be happy to teach a one evening class. I'd
even prefer that they get the Novice and get on the air for
a period of time before continuing on for the General... especially
if they are really newcomers to radio in general.

I'd set up the
class so the first week, we discuss that study guide which they will have
been asked to read in advance. We will discuss any questions that they
may
have on it. The remaining class weeks would cover the material to go on
to
General.

Again, that's clearly your option to do as you want.

I want to bring new hams into the hobby but I'm simply not going to spend
my
time teaching material that simple.

Simple for you perhaps. When I was 13 I had literally NO knowledge
before becoming a Novice. Luckily my dad had a technical
background and had been a ham himself in the 1940s. There are,
I'm sure, many possible newcomers to ham radio whowould have
literally ZERO radio knowledge as a starting point. Frankly,
that can be a great advantage...no preconceived notion that
the individual aready knows it all.

Nothing against the people or even
really against the material. I simply expect a better return on my
investment of time. I will not get that teaching material aimed at the
elementary school level when I am teaching adults.

Why do you limit your teaching to adults...or only adults with
a pre-requisite knowledge of some radio basics?

To me the satisfaction comes in seeing their faces
light up when we've conquered a difficult chapter.

Why wouldn't you get the same enjoyment if the first chapter
was very basic radio concepts? For most people today, they don't
have any working knowledge of radio basics at all...especially
if they never took a high school or college physics course.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
If the tests are going to be geared to "an average sixth grader", and
one of the requirements is to sign a paper stating that you have read
part 97, exactly what is the class going to consist of? And since ther
is a good possibility that the General test is going to end up being at
the level of the Technician license.

I know I'm mixing proposals there, but the point is, maybe the new
novice or communicator should be easy enough that people *don't* have to
take any classes for it.

I'm sure there will be some that won't need any class and
will study or learn independent of any formal instruction. I did
exactly that myself as a teenager for Novice & General in the 50's.
On the other hand, I'd have no problem teaching a class targeted at
whatever the Novice syllabus of test material might actually end
up being.

My goal or objective would be to encourage
as many new people, especially kids, to get a novice license
and just see how it goes from there.

Sure, I will work with whatever we
have. That doesn't mean that I have to like it tho'

If you don't like teaching or working with some folks because
their initial knowledge base of radio is nonexistent then I'd
suggets you not even try as you have to be (IMHO) a
ready and willing instructor to any student group you might
encounter.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...

"Jim Hampton" wrote in message
...
[snip]
While I have no problem with the elimination of Morse code, nor have I a
problem with an easy entry level license, I am rather perplexed with the
continued insistance that the tests are too hard. I am also somewhat
surprised at a free ride of either codeless techs or tech plusses being
moved to general. The only techs which got the free ride were the techs
from years ago who took the general theory. The only difference was the
5
words per minute vs the 13 words per minute of the general class
license.
When the code requirement was dropped to 5 words per minute, the old
techs
had already passed the entire exam for new general class licensees.
Hmmmm
... come to think of it, they didn't get a 'free' ride - they passed the
same elements as newly issued general class licenses.

Just my thoughts ...

And keep in mind that that upgrade isn't exactly "free". They have to
take
the time and energy to find or get the necessary proof of license, find a
test session, show up at said test session, and process the paperwork.

Actually there's no need at all to do that. All the FCC needs to
do is change the rules to reflect that all Techs licenses are now
General and they will be reissued as General as they individually
expire and are renewed. The same would be true for Advanced to
Extra, and, if the NCVEC petition wins out with the new entry
license being "Communicator" then existing Novice licenses
would be equivalent to Communicator and renewed as such when
the current license expired. There is NO immediate need for any
paperwork to happen at all.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK