an idea

[KC0NBW]

what if any club that gives radio classes starts out teaching morse code and does not move on to the theory until everyone can pass element 1 ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[KA3RFE]

Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ May 29 2005,13:20)]what if any club that gives radio classes starts out teaching morse code and does not move on to the theory until everyone can pass element 1 ? #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Why?

[K9STH]

I moved this thread to the more appropriate forum.

Glen, K9STH
One of the QRZ.com moderators

[ai4ep]

Why punish the fast learners for what the others can't/wont/dont really try to do ?

You might have some of the " gimme, gimme, gimme " crowd slowing down the progress of the entire class...looking for a FREE RIDE.

[N0KLT]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ May 29 2005,15:47)]Why punish the fast learners for what the others can't/wont/dont really try to do ?

You might have some of the " gimme, gimme, gimme " crowd slowing down the progress of the entire class...looking for a FREE RIDE.
More likely the 'gimme' crowd would never sign up for any class like that or they would quit it soon after starting.

[ai4ep]

Not the stubborn ones that want a FREE ride !!

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ May 29 2005,13:20)]what if any club that gives radio classes starts out teaching morse code and does not move on to the theory until everyone can pass element 1 ? #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
as i said in the original post, the entire class learns morse code before the class moves on to theory, no code, no theory, but the whiners would be welcome to go elsewhere. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[kj5t]

It would certainly keep people from getting stuck on 2 meters. I spent three years as a tech without code, and was happy when I forced myself to learn code and pass that test.

[w4rot]

"... I soon found an opportunity to be introduced to a famous professor Johann Bernoulli. ... True, he was very busy and so refused flatly to give me private lessons; but he gave me much more valuable advice to start reading more difficult mathematical books on my own and to study them as diligently as I could; if I came across some obstacle or difficulty, I was given permission to visit him freely every Sunday afternoon and he kindly explained to me everything I could not understand ..."
Quote From L.Euler.
Just do it.
w4rot

[N8CPA]

Considering that human beings learn to talk before they learn to count, it makes sense to teach the basic language of Amateur Radio before tackling the technical aspects. #But such an approach would not work today. Too many people have already had too much positive reinforecement of CW--CaterWauling about Element 1.

[K9STH]

Back in the "goode olde dayes", before the no-code Technician Class, every amateur radio class that I know of started with the International Morse code. That was because the student had to pass the code before the FCC would even send out the Novice or Technician written examination package.

Even when you went to take your General Class at an FCC office you had to pass your code test before you could take the written test. Fail the code test, come back in 30 days and try again.

Glen, K9STH

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ May 30 2005,08:34)]Back in the "goode olde dayes", before the no-code Technician Class, every amateur radio class that I know of started with the International Morse code. #That was because the student had to pass the code before the FCC would even send out the Novice or Technician written examination package.

Even when you went to take your General Class at an FCC office you had to pass your code test before you could take the written test. #Fail the code test, come back in 30 days and try again.

Glen, K9STH
any responsible club that is running classes should do the same thing today !

tell all the potential students that they will be taught the code first and have to pass a receive test and then and only then will they be allowed to move on to the club sponsored theory classes.

if the students are not willing to learn that way, they are free to go elsewhere.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[W5HTW]

Interesting. When I used to teach amateur radio classes, through a club, it was quite integrated. We'd have a half hour of code, then an hour of theory. The time elements might vary a bit, but it was all done in the same class, which gave a break from any one thing. Sometimes we started with theory, would take a half hour for code, then return to theory.

Some people, even then, did not want to devote themselves to learning amateur radio. They wanted a license, yes, but their "wants" were not matched by their "dedication." They dropped out. Usually it was the code that stumped them. Once in a while it was the theory, and sometimes both.

Our - and my - philosophy was that not everyone in life was guaranteed a ham license. Some could not make it. Some really couldn't learn the code, or appeared not able to do so. There was nothing in the Constitution that guaranteed them the right to a ham ticket. We tried to help, individual instruction, encouragement. But if a person had a block against the code, and some did, we would finally wind up encouraging them to forget about ham radio and do something else. That was life. Some can't play baseball, some can't swim. Some can't do ham radio. The trend has, though, in recent years, been to assure that everyone can be a ham. They still can't swim or catch a ball, but they can be a ham.

It is true what Glen said; when the FCC was doing the testing, the order was: (1) pass the receiving test. (2) pass the sending test. (3) Only when both those were passed, would one get to even see a written test. Perhaps that approach lingers on a bit with the clubs that are teaching today. The Novice and Technician, and the Conditional, were given by volunteer examiners. Again, the requirement was the volunteer examiner (not a VEC as we know it today, but simply a ham of General or above) followed the same procedure. Receiving first, sending next, and only then did the student get to see the exam.

In fact, when I took my Novice, I think the process was even more restrictive. Seems to me the examiner had to send for the application form, get it, test me on Morse, and then certifty that I had passed. Only then could he even SEND for the written exam. But it has been a long time, and I'm not sure.

Perhaps some clubs recognize that the code is the biggest stumbling block to getting a ham license, so they concentrate on it. The theory is mostly memorization, especially for the entry level tests. Memorization is best done not in the club class, but at home, on an individual level. That makes it understandable that the club class would concentrate mostly on Morse, and then toss in the discusson on regulations and rules - the "How" to be a ham.

Because our clubs did it differently, in that we actually taught the electronics theory behind the license, it was easier to mix the theory (not memorization) classes in with the code. Were I teaching today, that is probably still the approach I'd use.

As to applying the all pass/all fail approach to public schools, in a way that occurs. The 7th grade is promoted to 8th grade. A couple of students may be held back, now that social promotion is not quite as popular as it used to be. A few years back, though, no one was held back. So the entire class did move forward, whether or not everyone was prepared to do so.

I knew well a victim of this philosophy. She did fine in 4th grade, so was promoted to 5th. She didn't do as well there. But she was promoted to 6th. She didn't have the good 5th grade background, so in 6th grade she did much worse. Still, she was promoted to 7th. Now she was deeply confused, and way behind. She was promoted to 8th. At this point, school became useless to her. Counselors worked with her, tried to help, but she was too far behind. She was tested. She read well at 4th grade level, could read acceptably at 5th grade, could write marginally at 5th grade level. She was promoted to 9th grade. Three months later she quit school. She went on her own, studied at her own level, and three years later got an equivalency (GED) certificate. Today she is in her 40s, and can't write two sentences that are coherent. She is, however, good at math, and great with people. She has worked in a bank now for years.

Read the forums. You see the results of social promotion. Not encouraging at all.

Ham radio, though, is not a profession. It is not a career. I agree with the idea of teaching what is necessary to get the license, though our club's approach was to teach that basic foundation, which then made advancement easier. Still, we kept it pretty basic for the Novice classes. A bit of DC theory and Ohm's law. Then the club also taught advanced classes for General. After Incentive Licensing, the club began classes for Extra Class as well, including the code and advanced theory.

But ham radio is a "want to" thing, not a "need to" thing. If you want it, fine. If you don't, that's fine, too. I believe, though, one should "want to" in order to get a license. That means a need for an interest beyond the very casual "what is this" and "darn, I think I want one of those" approach, and a willingness to exert a bit of mental effort.

Maybe that is what these clubs believe? Though few do, it seems. If they do, I say "Good for them!"

Ed

[KC0NBW]

i am not proposing an all pass/all fail scenario.
what i propose is learning the code before moving on to theory. if you don't learn the code, you don't go on to the theory.

that way the people that are willing and capable #of learning get to move on, the others drop out, just like the real world. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[ai4ep]

......so the basic idea is for folks to " LEARN the morse code first...then ( and only then ) after they have LEARNED the morse code ( and proven they can actually LEARN something ) to study the written test.

Not a bad idea.

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ May 30 2005,10:22)]......so the basic idea is for folks to " LEARN the morse code first...then ( and only then ) after they have LEARNED the morse code ( and proven they can actually LEARN something ) to study the written test.

Not a bad idea.
exactly !

after all, i learned the code and if i can do it, anyone can ! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[ai4ep]

...Let us see now, there are 35 ? questions on the GENERAL exam...with a "wrong answer margin of 5 ? wrong answers and still pass ".....so...the average CB op can memorize 29 - 30 questions to pass the WRITTEN part of the GENERAL class test....so... the real challenge is the ability to actually LEARN the morse code..........then all you have to do is memorize 29-30 written test questions .

That is all there is to it ?

...basically the problem is in the individual s ability to LEARN the morse code, not memorize the written test. ... Right ?

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ May 30 2005,10:37)]...Let us see now, there are 35 ? questions on the GENERAL exam...with a "wrong answer margin #of 5 ? wrong answers and still pass ".....so...the average CB op can memorize 29 - 30 questions to pass the WRITTEN part of the GENERAL class test....so... the real challenge is the ability to actually LEARN the morse code..........then #all you have to do is memorize 29-30 written test questions .

That is all there is to it ?

...basically the problem is in the individual s ability to LEARN the morse code, not memorize the written test. # ... #Right #?
it is not a matter of ''memorizing'' 29 or 30 questions because all the tests are not the same and there is a quite large question pool that the ve's have to pick from. you would have to memorize the entire question pool. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[ai4ep]

well...the odds are that IF you go to the same test place twice or more that you will be givien the same WRITTEN test more than one time.

So the odds are in favor of memorization, if you go to the same place each & every time. Just because YOU did not get the same test on the 2 nd or THIRD try does not mean that the person next to you did not. There are odds to everything.

But...learning the morse code first shows every one else there that YOU have a real determination to LEARN.

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ May 30 2005,11:23)]well...the odds are that IF you go to the same test place #twice or more that you will be givien the same WRITTEN test more than one time.

So the odds are in favor of memorization, if you go to the same place each & every time. #Just because YOU did not get the same test on the 2 nd or THIRD try does not mean that the person next to you did not. #There are odds to everything.

But...learning the morse code first shows #every one else there #that YOU have a real determination to LEARN.
seeing as there is an almost infinite number of combinations of questions available to make up a test, and each vec that makes up tests do not create identical tests it would take quite a few test sessions at just one test site to assure yourself that you have seen all the possible test pool questions and you can remember all of them !

another factor is how many different copies of the various tests each vec maintains for use !

that would tend to be a bit expensive to try to pass the test that way, it would be much simpler and less expensive to merely study the material and then go in and take the test !

there was one thread where someone mentioned a guy that kept coming in and taking the code test repeatedly, apparently hoping he would luck out and guess his way through the element one !

i don't recall as if it was ever mentioned whether he was successful or not ! # #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (KM5FL @ May 30 2005,12:23)]Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ May 30 2005,12:10)]i am not proposing an all pass/all fail scenario.
what i propose is learning the code before moving on to theory. if you don't learn the code, you don't go on to the theory.

that way the people that are willing and capable #of learning get to move on, the others drop out, just like the real world. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
That's not what you said here:

Quote (KC0NBW @ May 29 2005,13:20)
what if any club that gives radio classes starts out teaching morse code and does not move on to the theory until everyone can pass element 1 ? # #

Sounds like "all fail/all pass" to me.

KM5FL
perhaps i should have added that anyone that does not successfully pass the code test would be required to drop out of the class so that the rest of the class could move on to the next stage ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

after all, they could be accused of holding the rest of the class back if they did not drop out ! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (KM5FL @ May 30 2005,12:38)][QUOTE=Quote (KC0NBW @ May 30 2005,12:10)]i am not proposing an all pass/all fail scenario.
what i propose is learning the code before moving on to theory. if you don't learn the code, you don't go on to the theory.

that way the people that are willing and capable #of learning get to move on, the others drop out, just like the real world. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
That's not what you said here:

Quote(KC0NBW @ May 29 2005,13:20)
# #

Sounds like "all fail/all pass" to me.

KM5FL
it's amazing how your post of 12:23 disappeared and came back again at 12:38 !

you wouldn't be deleting your previous posts by chance ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[kb2vxa]

Another code/no-code debate. Whoopee.

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (KM5FL @ May 30 2005,14:55)]Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ May 30 2005,14:50)]Quote[/b] (KM5FL @ May 30 2005,12:38)][QUOTE=Quote (KC0NBW @ May 30 2005,12:10)]i am not proposing an all pass/all fail scenario.
what i propose is learning the code before moving on to theory. if you don't learn the code, you don't go on to the theory.

that way the people that are willing and capable #of learning get to move on, the others drop out, just like the real world. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
That's not what you said here:

Quote(KC0NBW @ May 29 2005,13:20)
# #

Sounds like "all fail/all pass" to me.

KM5FL
it's amazing how your post of 12:23 disappeared and came back again at 12:38 !

you wouldn't be deleting your previous posts by chance ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Nope... I didn't delete it.. I made that post in the middle of a thunder storm and the power momentarily went out. When it came back on, I couldn't find the post so I reposted.. My only explaination is the devil did it.. # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I shut everything down for a couple hours while the storm passed, but I'm back now.. I must admit, the reply sequence sure does look goofy now.. # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

KM5FL
it was already posted and i quoted it then it disappeared?

ok, i will give you the benefit of the doubt,after all strange things happen.

i will say that the odds of that happening again are very slim though http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[K0RGR]

Many years ago, you needed a 'Mountain Drivers License' to drive in the Rockies in Colorado. Part of the test was to get out and cut down a small tree to drag behind the car in case the brakes failed.

I guess all responsible driving schools in Colorado should teach how to chop down trees, in case they ever require that on the test again.

We've moved to a two-weekend class format for our classes, because it is very tough to get people to show for a 10-week class. (Yes, I know you did it, but frankly, you didn't have a life.) We provide a code course on CD for everybody to use if they choose, and some do.

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ May 30 2005,15:35)]Many years ago, you needed a 'Mountain Drivers License' to drive in the Rockies in Colorado. Part of the test was to get out and cut down a small tree to drag behind the car in case the brakes failed.

I guess all responsible driving schools in Colorado should teach how to chop down trees, in case they ever require that on the test again.

We've moved to a two-weekend class format for our classes, because it is very tough to get people to show for a 10-week class. (Yes, I know you did it, but frankly, you didn't have a life.) We provide a code course on CD for everybody to use if they choose, and some do.
back in the fall of 96, i was coming across wyoming from the west and i got up to one of the mountain passes and the highway patrol had the road blocked and were turning people back for not having chains for their tires. when i came up, they looked at my pickup truck with a minnesota plate on it and waved me on through !

there was only about 8 inches of snow in the pass ! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ May 30 2005,15:45)].

We've moved to a two-weekend class format for our classes, because it is very tough to get people to show for a 10-week class. (Yes, I know you did it, but frankly, you didn't have a life.) We provide a code course on CD for everybody to use if they choose, and some do
we didn't have a life?

that's a laugh, i'm sure that we all had every bit as much of a life as anyone in your area.
i was married with 2 kids and held down a full time job as well as doing some work on my own to make a little extra cash to keep a young family above water !

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

i made the time to go to the classes so i could get my licence .

we had no choice, we learned the code, then we moved on to theory.

[K0RGR]

Now, now, I didn't intend that to you personally - it was a bit of a joke - I sat through, and also taught a lot of 10 week classes, so if anybody doesn't have a life, it's me. But after looking up your home QTH, I can see why you didn't bother with the Tech license - pretty worthless up there, huh? Maybe if you lived in Minneapolis, you'd have a different opinion? Activity is nothing to write home about here in Rochester, but at least you can find a QSO if you work at it and have more than an HT.

Necessity is a mother - but just because you had to do something is not a reason that everybody else should have to. I had to draw schematics and send and receive 20 WPM for my Extra. Did you? I think everybody should.

[ai4ep]

I STILL do like the idea of LEARNing the morse code first, and then the written test.

I learned it that way, and look at me now !!
( I wanted to get the hardest part over with first ...and I did. )

AI4ep educated person

[KM5FL]

KC0NBW:

Just for fun and to jack with your head, I'll delete all my posts to this thread except this one..

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ May 30 2005,17:55)]Now, now, I didn't intend that to you personally - it was a bit of a joke - I sat through, and also taught a lot of 10 week classes, so if anybody doesn't have a life, it's me. But after looking up your home QTH, I can see why you didn't bother with the Tech license - pretty worthless up there, huh? Maybe if you lived in Minneapolis, you'd have a different opinion? #Activity is nothing to write home about here in Rochester, but at least you can find a QSO if you work at it and have more than an HT.

Necessity is a mother - but just because you had to do something is not a reason that everybody else should have to. #I had to draw schematics and send and receive 20 WPM for my Extra. Did you? I think everybody should.
if you looked me up on qrz you should have read the short bio.

i was first licenced as wn0uyw in 1975
i was issued wb0uyw when the fcc dropped the n for the novice calls. i upgraded and was active for quite awhile under that call.

i did take tests before the fcc back then and had to draw schematics etc.

i had some other issues to deal with in the late 80s and let the licence go. i decided to get back into radio in the spring of 2002 and started studying for the general test.

someone told me if i could show an old call book to prove i was licenced before, that i would not have to take the code test again.
i took an old callbook with me #to the test session and found that not only did i not have to take the code test again, i didn't have to take the general class written, all i had to do was take the then current tech written to get the general.
in early june of '02 a friend and i went to a test session and we both took and passed the extra.

by the way, i did live in the cities when i was first licenced, i #moved back north again in 1996.

due to injuries from an accident, i ended up back in the forest lake area for awhile in the fall of 2000 #i moved back to my present location in the fall of '03.

it is not ''worthless'' up there by any means !

i have 20 acres off a dead end gravel road. #no immediate neighbors, no traffic, and all the room i want for antennas.

i live in an unorganized township, 21 of the 36 square miles do not have a house or a road in them !

there is a very good repeater system going up there and i also am in a very good spot for hf without a lot of iinterference.

all in all, a ham's paradise ! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

what more could i ask for ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[W1SMC]

What I would like to see is at testing seesions an "Optional CW Test" be offered to those hams and/or prospective hams. If they pass say a 13 (General) and or 20 (Extra) wpm test they would recieve a formal certificate indicating they passed that level of the code. (Hell, they could number the certs and we could have (another) 10-10 type club and have (another) cw contest to look forward to. Also, you pay 2 to 5 dollars to take the test and the money goes to the club giving the test. This adds to the clubs kitty, and gives those of us that love the code somewhat of a zing. Just my .02.

[wa9cwx]

Lot of good ideas.....
What I would want a club to do, is teach some basic HISTORY of the service ( maybe just a half hour talk!), and BASIC OPERATING skills, INCLUDING proper jargon.
10-4? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
Also, IF you teach code, teach HOW TO SEND!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[k6bbc]

The code is dead people -- get over it.

K6BBC

[K3UD]

Why would you teach the code if the goal was to get a Technician license in the first place?

A better way to approach this is to advertise the class as a way to earn the General, and all of its privileges in one shot. People who do not like the code or do not want to learn the code would not want to be in the class, which solves the code / no code debate within the class. You would have people in the class who know what they will be required to do and hopefully will dedicate themselves to do it.

Ed, W5HTW said that when he did classes they vroke it down to half the class time being split between code and theory. That is the way I did it when I was doing it at the continuing educational level at a local community college. It seemed to work but we were teaching for the Novice or Tech class at 5 WPM at the time.

I wonder what would happen if some of the clubs who do instruction started teaching for the General in the first place. Graduates of those classes would immediately have a richer ham radio experience because of all the things you can do with a General License that you can not do with a Tech.

73
George
K3UD

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ May 31 2005,08:03)]Why would you teach the code if the goal was to get a Technician license in the first place?

A better way to approach this is to advertise the class as a way to earn the General, and all of its privileges in one shot. People who do not like the code or do not want to learn the code would not want to be in the class, which solves the code / no code debate within the class. You would have people in the class who know what they will be required to do and hopefully will dedicate themselves to do it.

Ed, W5HTW said that when he did classes they vroke it down to half the class time being split between code and theory. That is the way I did it when I was doing it at the continuing educational level at a local community college. It seemed to work but we were teaching for the Novice or Tech class at 5 WPM at the time.

I wonder what would happen if some of the clubs who do instruction started teaching for the General in the first place. Graduates of those classes would immediately have a richer ham radio experience because of all the things you can do with a General License that you can not do with a Tech.

73
George
K3UD
that is basically what i was getting at, teach the code first, and then only the people that learned the code would move on to the theory, no exceptions .

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (w1smc @ May 31 2005,05:11)]What I would like to see is at testing seesions an "Optional CW Test" be offered to those hams and/or prospective hams. #If they pass say a 13 (General) and or 20 (Extra) wpm test they would recieve a formal certificate indicating they passed that level of the code. #(Hell, they could number the certs and we could have (another) 10-10 type club and have (another) cw contest to look forward to. #Also, you pay 2 to 5 dollars to take the test and the money goes to the club giving the test. #This adds to the clubs kitty, and gives those of us that love the code somewhat of a zing. #Just my .02.
the cw test is already optional, either you choose to take it or you don't. if you don't pass it, you do not get the same privileges as those who do.

what is wrong with that ?

[K0RGR]

At this point, all we can do is wait for FCC to come up with their proposal, and see what they have in mind. No matter what it is, there will be a firestorm of protest.

[wa9cwx]

THE CODE IS DEAD PEOPLE....?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif?

Y U C K

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[w5lda]

You guys that would like this type of testing need to screw your head on right.Is that the way you tested?
Probably not,so why have new hams take a different test than you? I realize a lot of you did test this way,but others did not and now want newbies to learn code first,especially one guy that was a tech for 12years,,,Geeze! Like one poster said,this is just another code/no code fight

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (kd5vsg @ June 02 2005,03:38)]You guys that would like this type of testing need to screw your head on right.Is that the way you tested?
Probably not,so why have new hams take a different test than you? I realize a lot of you did test this way,but others did not and now want newbies to learn code first,especially one guy that was a tech for 12years,,,Geeze! Like one poster said,this is just another code/no code fight
i knew one ham(now a silent key) that was a tech for 27 years before he upgraded !

but he passed 3 code tests to get to the advanced level.

the number of hams in the united states that have passed a code test is quite a bit larger than the number that have not !

the vast majority of the ones that want to drop the code requirement are no code techs that stand to get something for nothing, naturally they are going to be all for it !

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[W5MJL]

I think the obvious answer is as follows.

Teach the code first.

Anyone who can't pass the 5 wpm code test within 4 weeks should have 1 finger removed. #A new finger should be removed for each additional week it takes to pass the test. # Should all 10 fingers be removed a special license can be issued to allow hf privileges on 10 meters only.

This is the best method to determine whether their interest is real or just a passing fad. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[kl7aj]

I'm sorry. Ideas are forbidden here!



Eric

[K9STH]

NBW:

Don't know where you got 3 code tests. The Advanced Class only called for a 13 words per minute examination. If the person held either a Novice Class or one of the pre-no-code Technician Class Licneses he/she would have to had to have passed 2 examinations: 5 wpm and 13 wpm.

After passing the 13 wpm for General there was no additional code examination for the Advanced. Thus, there would have been 2 maximum examinations. In fact, one could get an Advanced Class by taking just the General and Advanced Class theory (the Technician Class theory used to be exactly the same as the General Class) after passing a 13 wpm code examination. There was never a requirement that an amateur radio operator had to hold either a Novice or Technician Class before upgrading to General.

Glen, K9STH

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ June 02 2005,09:54)]NBW:

Don't know where you got 3 code tests. #The Advanced Class only called for a 13 words per minute examination. #If the person held either a Novice Class or one of the pre-no-code Technician Class Licneses he/she would have to had to have passed 2 examinations: #5 wpm and 13 wpm.

After passing the 13 wpm for General there was no additional code examination for the Advanced. #Thus, there would have been 2 maximum examinations. #In fact, one could get an Advanced Class by taking just the General and Advanced Class theory (the Technician Class theory used to be exactly the same as the General Class) after passing a 13 wpm code examination. #There was never a requirement that an amateur radio operator had to hold either a Novice or Technician Class before upgrading to General.

Glen, K9STH
he took the 5 word novice test, for some reason,the fcc retested him for the tech( the code test )
and then he took the 13 for the advanced, therefore 3 tests !

he was a sk before the no code came to be.

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (ka5fap @ June 02 2005,09:02)]I think the obvious answer is as follows.

Teach the code first.

Anyone who can't pass the 5 wpm code test within 4 weeks should have 1 finger removed. #A new finger should be removed for each additional week it takes to pass the test. # Should all 10 fingers be removed a special license can be issued to allow hf privileges on 10 meters only.

This is the best method to determine whether their interest is real or just a passing fad. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
qlf ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[K9STH]

Back in the 1950s and 1960s there was an amateur who only had limited movement of his left foot, no use of his hands, etc. He mastered the code (passed the 13 wpm test required for General at the time) and loved sending CW using his foot with a straight key. His "fist" (well, "foot") was excellent. However, he often used the "QLF" to tell people that he was actually sending with his left foot.

QLF without a question mark supposedly means "I am sending with my left foot". Of course, it was never an "official" Q-Signal. However, it has been "around" for decades.


Now, the fellow who took the code test "3 times". If he held a Novice Class then a Technician Class he would have had to have taken 4 tests. It did not matter if you held a Novice Class, you still had to take a CW examination before you could take your Technician Class. Both of those examinations would have been given by a "volunteer" examiner. The General Class would have been given only by an FCC engineer. Since any test given by a volunteer could (actually can still be) result in the amateur radio operator being "called in" to take the examination before an FCC engineer, the situation "called for" a retest by an FCC staff member.

There were all sorts of Conditional Class licensees that were required to retest as well as a "fair" number of Technician Class licensees. Unfortunately, the majority of both were not able to pass the examinations and had their licenses revoked. That is one advantage of having taken examinations before an FCC engineer. You cannot be called in (under present regulations) to retake any portion of your examinations that were taken under FCC supervision. If you took a part of your examinations under a VEC then that portion, and that portion only, can result in a "retest". But, for the portion that you passed with the "stern-eyed" FCC examiner looking on you cannot be required to retest.

Glen, K9STH

[KC0NBW]

he claimed to have taken the tech test at an fcc test site, i cannot comment beyond that as to whether he did or not

he got the novice, the technician, and the advanced. 3 code tests, possibly 4 written tests, possibly only 3 if they gave him credit for the tech written .

as i was not there when he took any of his tests, i can only repeat what he told me.

[W0LC]

Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ May 29 2005,13:20)]what if any club that gives radio classes starts out teaching morse code and does not move on to the theory until everyone can pass element 1 ? #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
What would be the point of that?
You could reverse that and state, that not until everyone passes a written exam, they won't be taught code.

I suppose I am not sure where this is headed.

[KC0NBW]

if any group presenting a class to obtain a ham licence required their students to learn morse code and pass a code test before they were allowed to move on to the theory,maybe we would have a lot less problems on the bands and less whining on the internet by people that are not willing to learn more to get more privileges.

[N8CPA]

What such a class structure would accomplish is to ensure that the students would get HF operating privileges with their first license. They would even get voice privileges on 10M. It would avoid the perceived bait & switch licensing scenario of getting the license candidates intrigued with DX, then license them for LOS. Tell them the "bad news" up front, "To do what I'm doing, you must pass a test for Morse at 5WPM. The good news is that it's easy." In other words, sell the Tech license the same way the old Novice was sold to prospective hams. Sounds like a plan to me!

[KC0NBW]

exactly !

tell them that if all they are interested in is the no code tech, they are looking in the wrong place because it will not happen in this class.

you will learn morse code before we move on to the written theory, no exceptions.

if you are not willing to work with us, you are free to go elsewhere, now, who is still with us ? #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif