Jim, If I can jump in here with some comments please.
The current Extra class (and all other classes as well) are more oriented toward operating practices than to detailed technical knowledge. Basic electrical laws and knowledge are not really required to pass the test. So, questions about ohms law or how to calculate power can be ignored if the applicant can excel at answering all the questions about operating and FCC rules correctly. I cannot judge whether this is all good or bad, but the engineer in me says that the Extra class candidate should possess at least some knowledge of basic electrical laws, formulas and circuits - that is what sets the Extra class apart from the other license classes. Quite another point is the multiple choice question format - it is an easy matter for those with a good memory to simply memorize the question pool with no understanding of the principles behind the questions. To really administer a test with drawings and other facets that communicate a knowledge of the subject requires examiners who will impartially evaluate the tests with the many variants that can arise from different applicants - it requires informed judgment, and that is not a task that can be trusted to the current group of VEs since they are not trained that way. So I see the exam as sitting between a 'rock and a hard place'. Decisions must be made for the sake of both the applicants and the examiners. The majority of new Extra Class hams are no longer the experimenting kind, but they should be informed operators, and (much to my disappointment) they are not the 'techies' of electronics that the Extra class licensees used to be. It is obvious from some of the questions posed by Extra Class hams that they simply memorized the question pool rather than attempting to understand the basic principles, and that part is saddening to me. Unfortunately, I do not know of an easy cure other than reverting to the qualified FCC examiners of old times. 73, Don W3FPR Jim Wiley wrote: > So, Ron, what do you think of the Extra exam today? Is it "watered > down" from what you remember (not counting the fact that we no longer > have a code exam or a requirement to draw schematic diagrams)? I would > be interested in your honest assessment, mostly because I am curious, > and also because I am one of the members of the NCVEC Question Pool > Committee that wrote the questions for the current pool. We always > value comments (good or bad) from instructors, as it gives us an > opportunity to fine tune the pools to better reach our intended audience. > > > If something is too easy, we need to know that, and conversely, if > something is too difficult or obscure, we need to know that too. > Mostly, we care whether or not, in your opinion, a person who passes the > exam is prepared to assume the responsibilities of the license. Not an > expert, to be sure, but with a clear understanding of the rules and > privileges, as well as the technical challenges presented by the license. > > > However, be careful when evaluating the questions, because it is easy to > forget that persons such as yourself tend to have years of experience, > and the person taking the test probably doesn't have anything like that > to fall back on. In other words, an exam question or concept that is > "dead nuts easy" for you because you have been using that formula or > method every day may be brand new (and difficult to grasp) for a person > taking the exam. Consider each question as if you had never, or at > least only in the briefest sense, encountered that particular subject > before. > > > And yes, every time I teach a class, I learn a whole bunch more than the > students! Whoever said that the best way to really learn a subject was > to teach it hit the nail on the head! Oh, and by the way, I passed my > Extra in the early 70's too. I was originally licensed as a novice in > 1959, then onward to Tech a year later, then General about 2 years after > that, then Advanced in the late 60's. Getting to be an OF. > > > Thanks. > > > - Jim, KL7CC > > > > Ron D'Eau Claire wrote: > >> I passed the Extra back in the 1970's. Twenty years later my local Ham club >> was looking for license class instructors. I thought it'd be fun to do a >> whiz-bang demo of basic circuit theory for new Novices or Techs. >> >> But they wanted someone to teach Extra theory. Okay, that's what they needed >> and I was there to help. >> >> Had I known what I was getting into I might not have been so agreeable. >> (Isn't that true of most things?) I suspect I learned a lot more than my >> students. I've always subscribed to the theory that a good teacher has to >> know at least 10X what he/she intends to teach so I was soon digging through >> piles of texts on the various subjects touched upon in the study guide - and >> the Extra exams had changed greatly since I passed the test. >> >> It's said that we teach what we, ourselves, most need to learn. It was a >> real boon to me. Not just in getting 'up to date' but I got a real feeling >> of satisfaction to hear from each student as he/she passed the Extra test. >> >> So, if want to learn and the opportunity arises to help someone pass the >> test... >> >> Ron AC7AC >> >> >> > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.9/1993 - Release Date: 03/10/09 > 07:19:00 > > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
