On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 02:58:42 GMT, Mike Coslo wrote:

All sounds sensible, but the month before retesting thing seems a bit
obsessive. I can understand not retesting the same day, but not a month
wait.

Made lots of sense. In SF we gave the tests once a week, on Friday,
and we were not equipped to handle the same folks week after week.
The five weeks between test-eligible days was adequate time to prepare
better.

Now here is something that seems has been improved upon. If there are
going to be different elements, it makes sense that if one element was
passed, that you don't have to be restested on it. I had to test for my
General twice because I flunked element 1 the first time. I passed the
writtens, I would have passed them again. Not muchpoint in wasting the
VE's time.

Elements 1 and 2 were simple stuff. Now if one passed the 13 WPM
code and the General written but failed the Advanced written, one
got a General license and did not have to retake the code or the
General written test to take the Advanced written test the next month.

The Extra, OTOH, was a "package". One could take the 20 WPM code,
pass it, pass the General and the Advanced writtens, and fail the
Extra written. Then, one would get an Advanced license, but would
still have to retake the 20 WPM code and the Extra written.

Usually they would not tell you how well you did other than "Pass"
or "Fail". They did NOT tell you which ones you got wrong. (At least
not in Philly).

In NY, if things were quiet, "Uncle Charlie" Finkelman would let you
watch while he graded the exam, but you could not review the
grading. In SF, you handed the paper in, and if things were slow
you would get the P/F results while you packed up your gear.
Otherwise, you went home and you were notified by mail of passing or
failing if you left a SAS postcard with the examiner.

The VE system is a huge improvemnet over tha old system, I have to say.

That's your opinion. I beg to differ, but I'm biased.

Regardless of the Morse requirements or the test contents, the testing
system was not superior at all IMO.

That's your opinion. I beg to differ, but I'm biased.

Interestingly enough, it would appear that matching up what was
happening in the country at the time this was happening, the FCC tester
(government) was replaced by the VE's (non-profit, but certainly private
sector. The changes in the tests might seem like a de-regultion type of
move.

That was the era of privatizing the FCC's functions. I call it
what it is - avoiding the FCC's responsibilities traceable to
the ineptitude of leadership of the agency and of the country as a
whole. "Get rid of what you don't understand" is the easy way out,
not the smart way.

The amateur testing was but the tip off the iceberg. Within ten
years (1985 - 1995), the following responsibilities were "privatized",
i.e. spun off to the private sector.

Testing of amateur license applicants.

Testing of commercial operator license applicants.

Testing and certification of broadcast operators, now made
voluntary.

Testing and certification of land mobile repair and adjustment
technicians, now made voluntary.

Frequency coordination in the microwave, broadcast and land mobile
services.

Interference resolution in the microwave, broadcast and land
mobile services.

Bi-annual inspection and certification of compliance of broadcast
stations.

Inspection and certification of marine radio installations
required for safety by statute or treaty on passenger-carrying
and ocean-going cargo vessels.

Auctions and encouraging wireline and wireless competition are
deemed to be far more important than patrolling the ether.

And the beat goes on.

I guess I'm not going to blame the liberals for this one....

They're both guilty. Stupid is as stupid does.....

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon