Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
1. Most everything is done that way today. Doesn't make it right! Make a question pool large enough, and there is no problem. Sure there is. A thought: If a question pool is cheating, then a book with the answers in the test in the course of reading is cheating too Question pools don't equal cheating unless they are supposed to be secret. So... The only way that *some* Hams will be happy is if the test questions have answers in no book - that is to say that all testing will have to be in the form of basic research - the new ham will have to advance the state of the art in his/her admission test. bwaaahaahaa Otherwise the new ham is cheating and isn't as good as the old ham. 8^) (I just recently had to listen to an old timer in person on a tirade about the worthless new hams - again.) Why did you have to listen? I find turning on my heel and walking away does wonders. Or, looking the ranter straight in the eye and saying, "You're just wrong...." (lookit how the oldest ranter here on rrap reacts to being told he's wrong - which he often is....) Besides, what it all comes down to is this: Hams - old and new - didn't change the exam procedures. Neither did ARRL, NCI, NCVEC or any other ham group. FCC did, because it saved them resources. We aren't going to a system other than multiple-choice published-Q&A-pool exams in the foreseeable future. Just not gonna happen. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Response to "21st Century" Part One (Code Test) | Policy | |||
My response to Jim Wiley, KL7CC | Policy | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1366  October 17 2003 | Dx | |||
Low reenlistment rate | Policy | |||
NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement. | Policy |