I question how the question pool is so much worse of a learning tool
than say a book.

Here's something to try.


Let us take a website:


http://www.ewh.ieee.org/reg/7/millen...scientist.html



This is IEEE's write-up on Reginald Fessenden.

Let's take a situation where there is a question on the first date of
transmitted sound.

Quoting from the page:

Professor Kintner, who was working for Fessenden at that time,
designed an interrupter to give 10,000 breaks a second, and this
interrupter was built by Brashear, an optician. The interrupter was
delivered in January or February 1900, but experiments were not
conducted until the fall of that year. To modulate his transmitter,
he inserted a carbon microphone directly in series with the antenna
lead. After many unsuccessful tries, transmission of speech over a
distance of 1.5 km was finally achieved on 23 December 1900, between
15-metre masts located at Cobb Island, Maryland.

A couple paragraphs later....

Fessenden's greatest radio communications successes happened in 1906.
On 10 January, two-way transatlantic telegraphic communication
was achieved -- another first – between Brant Rock, Massachusetts,
and Macrihanish, Scotland. James C. Armor, Fessenden's chief assistant,
was the operator at Macrihanish, and Fessenden himself was the operator
at Brant Rock.

End quote

There are some questions that may be easily taken from these paragraphs.

When was the date of the first successful voice transmission?

A. July 15, 1905

B. December 1, 1899

C. December 23, 1900

D. January 10, 1906

Some place you can look up the answer = C


What was the distance of the first transmission?

A. 1.5 Kilometers

B. 1.5 miles

C. Transatlantic

D. 5 meters

Some place you can look up the answer = A


Okay. So which is the superior method?


If I were to voice my preferences, I would just as soon read a nice
story about Mr. Fessenden than a dry question pool. But functionally the
two are identical.

Should the answers to the question pool be some deep hidden tome, not
accessible to the public? As much as the two methods are pretty much the
same, I would only agree with that if no one was allowed to study *any*
reference material *at all*. Reading the two paragraphs gives you the
*exact* same answers as looking at a question pool.

Finally, I deliberately included this particular material and this
specific question because of a current disagreement between to members
of the group.

Whereas probably most of us would answer question 1 with C, and
question 2 with A, there is at least one here that would answer the
questions with D and C.

What?! how can this be? First is interpretation. Regardless of the
reasons that some may have for a different answer, there has to be a
reference somewhere. And the nice thing about the question pool is that
you can see the answer that is wanted. Then the person taking the test
can decide whether they want to put in the desired answer, purposely
put in an answer that will be marked wrong, or argue with the test giver.

So NOT having a open question pool is going to cause trouble.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

What?! how can this be? First is interpretation. Regardless of the
reasons that some may have for a different answer, there has to be a
reference somewhere. And the nice thing about the question pool is that
you can see the answer that is wanted. Then the person taking the test
can decide whether they want to put in the desired answer, purposely
put in an answer that will be marked wrong, or argue with the test giver.

So NOT having a open question pool is going to cause trouble.

No "interpretation" is allowed in here, Mike.

Public disclosure of the amateur radio question pool (with answers)
has been deemed, variously, "dumbing down," "cheating," and
(probably) "unpatriotic." It is an evil that must be eradicated. :-)

All things on the amateur test must be kept the way it was for the
olde fartes...closed book, prim, proper, very very formal. The rest of
their life depends on the test outcome. It's the most important thing
in their lives and MUST be treated that way!

Might be fun to conjecture on your try at a real discussion. It would
meet with the usual hate-spew of certain creatures in here, though,
and quickly evaporate into the bit-bucket.

I've taken a few tests, both open-book and closed-book, neither of
which conditions bother me. The biggest "test" I've ever taken is
the continuing "test" of working for a living in electronics design.
Some of the time that work couldn't be either open- or closed-book;
no book existed to yield the "proper answers." :-)

LHA / WMD

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes:


What?! how can this be? First is interpretation. Regardless of the
reasons that some may have for a different answer, there has to be a
reference somewhere. And the nice thing about the question pool is that
you can see the answer that is wanted. Then the person taking the test
can decide whether they want to put in the desired answer, purposely
put in an answer that will be marked wrong, or argue with the test giver.

So NOT having a open question pool is going to cause trouble.


No "interpretation" is allowed in here, Mike.

Public disclosure of the amateur radio question pool (with answers)
has been deemed, variously, "dumbing down," "cheating," and
(probably) "unpatriotic." It is an evil that must be eradicated. :-)

See, they are doing it the wrong way. this should be done like some
college professors do - which is to write a book, then make that book
the subject of their classes. So if you take the class, you have to buy
the book!

Then again, I wonder if giving the name of a reference book would be
cheating?

Maybe take the prospective ham out in the woods, miles from nowhere for
a year or two, so they can't look things up or read about the test. then
on test day, put 'em in the test room and let 'em have a go at it.

THEN, those that pass will truly *know* the material. 8^)

All things on the amateur test must be kept the way it was for the
olde fartes...closed book, prim, proper, very very formal. The rest of
their life depends on the test outcome. It's the most important thing
in their lives and MUST be treated that way!

Might be fun to conjecture on your try at a real discussion. It would
meet with the usual hate-spew of certain creatures in here, though,
and quickly evaporate into the bit-bucket.

I've taken a few tests, both open-book and closed-book, neither of
which conditions bother me. The biggest "test" I've ever taken is
the continuing "test" of working for a living in electronics design.
Some of the time that work couldn't be either open- or closed-book;
no book existed to yield the "proper answers." :-)

Even open book tests work. I've taken them not knowing anything about a
subject, but after the test I do.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Question Pool vs Book Larnin'
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 7/19/2004 12:52 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

I've taken a few tests, both open-book and closed-book, neither of
which conditions bother me. The biggest "test" I've ever taken is
the continuing "test" of working for a living in electronics design.
Some of the time that work couldn't be either open- or closed-book;
no book existed to yield the "proper answers." :-)

Even open book tests work. I've taken them not knowing anything about a

subject, but after the test I do.

But at least with a test where the questions are not known in advance,
even in an "open book" test, the person being tested (a) still has to already
know enough about the subject to know WHERE to look, and (b) is going to
assimilate some of the material in the research phase of looking through the
book.

I used open book testing when teaching Avionics in the USMC with great
effectiveness. Not only did the students have a very high aggregate test
score, but it reinforced thier skills in using the maintenance manuals.

73

Steve, K4YZ

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


What?! how can this be? First is interpretation. Regardless of the
reasons that some may have for a different answer, there has to be a
reference somewhere. And the nice thing about the question pool is that
you can see the answer that is wanted. Then the person taking the test
can decide whether they want to put in the desired answer, purposely
put in an answer that will be marked wrong, or argue with the test giver.

So NOT having a open question pool is going to cause trouble.


No "interpretation" is allowed in here, Mike.

Public disclosure of the amateur radio question pool (with answers)
has been deemed, variously, "dumbing down," "cheating," and
(probably) "unpatriotic." It is an evil that must be eradicated. :-)

See, they are doing it the wrong way. this should be done like some
college professors do - which is to write a book, then make that book
the subject of their classes. So if you take the class, you have to buy
the book!

Absolutely. The "official" books are all published by the ARRL! :-)

Then again, I wonder if giving the name of a reference book would be
cheating?

Absolutely. There is only ONE reference: ARRL Handbook. :-)

Mike, in this forum, you can't ask discussion questions of the
normal sort. [it would be nice except for all the yell-yells in here]

However the modern U.S. amateur radio testing is done (or the U.S.
commercial operator license testing), if it wasn't by the old system
prior to question pools, the yell-yell answer is "it IS cheating." :-)

Maybe take the prospective ham out in the woods, miles from nowhere for

a year or two, so they can't look things up or read about the test. then
on test day, put 'em in the test room and let 'em have a go at it.

THEN, those that pass will truly *know* the material. 8^)

That's the standard military survival school training kind of thing.

I really doubt there is any sort of "need" for that kind of exaggerated
proof of performance. Amateur radio is, by and large, just a hobby.

All things on the amateur test must be kept the way it was for the
olde fartes...closed book, prim, proper, very very formal. The rest of
their life depends on the test outcome. It's the most important thing
in their lives and MUST be treated that way!

Might be fun to conjecture on your try at a real discussion. It would
meet with the usual hate-spew of certain creatures in here, though,
and quickly evaporate into the bit-bucket.

I've taken a few tests, both open-book and closed-book, neither of
which conditions bother me. The biggest "test" I've ever taken is
the continuing "test" of working for a living in electronics design.
Some of the time that work couldn't be either open- or closed-book;
no book existed to yield the "proper answers." :-)

Even open book tests work. I've taken them not knowing anything about a

subject, but after the test I do.

ALL learning begins with memorization. Few understand that.

Memorization skills are necessary to retain knowledge in order to
apply it later.

To venture into an analogy on licensing, taking a behind-the-wheel
driving test for nearly any state driver's license doesn't allow any
open-book answering. Inspector gets rather perturbed if one looks
in a book while driving. :-)

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , Mike Coslo writes:

What?! how can this be? First is interpretation. Regardless of the
reasons that some may have for a different answer, there has to be a
reference somewhere. And the nice thing about the question pool is that
you can see the answer that is wanted. Then the person taking the test
can decide whether they want to put in the desired answer, purposely
put in an answer that will be marked wrong, or argue with the test giver.

So NOT having a open question pool is going to cause trouble.

No "interpretation" is allowed in here, Mike.

Public disclosure of the amateur radio question pool (with answers)
has been deemed, variously, "dumbing down," "cheating," and
(probably) "unpatriotic." It is an evil that must be eradicated. :-)

All things on the amateur test must be kept the way it was for the
olde fartes...closed book, prim, proper, very very formal. The rest of
their life depends on the test outcome. It's the most important thing
in their lives and MUST be treated that way!

Might be fun to conjecture on your try at a real discussion. It would
meet with the usual hate-spew of certain creatures in here, though,
and quickly evaporate into the bit-bucket.

I've taken a few tests, both open-book and closed-book, neither of
which conditions bother me. The biggest "test" I've ever taken is
the continuing "test" of working for a living in electronics design.
Some of the time that work couldn't be either open- or closed-book;
no book existed to yield the "proper answers." :-)

LHA / WMD


Hello, Len


I guess, as in most things, "it all depends..."

Let's assume a newly minted extra class licensee. He/she knows the
(listed) answer as to what an emitter follower is. He/she also can
perform a simple math calculation as to what voltage will result (with
no current draw) at a tap in a voltage divider.

After a couple of years of on-air experience, he/she applies for a
tech job. There is a simple test to take to see if you understand
simple electronics. He/she is presented a very simple schematic of an
emitter follower with an open input (of course, a simple bias network
gives an appropriate voltage/current to the base) and an open output.
As can be expected, there is a resistor from ground to the emitter and
a resistor from the collector to +12 V. The questions a

1) what is the dc voltage at the output of the circuit?
2) What is the voltage at the collector of the transistor?

Assumptions are made that the transistor in question has a reasonably
high beta and they aren't looking for perfection anyways; just an
answer that would reasonably be seen if you stuck a digital meter on
the output.

If they answer the question, one can assume that they actually know
the material.

Of course, if the answer is that one wants the license only to "talk",
then the whole problem is moot. If you examine this newsgroup, you
will find a lot of code-tested amateurs, non-code tested amateurs, and
non-licensed folks that can not only talk, but argue up a storm

Whew! I'm back, finally, after changing ISPs and having a problem for
a week with my browser. Turned out there was a trojan dropper hanging
in an old abandoned folder and I kept getting hit with trojans locking
up the browser! Ad-aware, Spybot search and destroy, and AVG finally
cured the thing (with a brief boot to DOS to delete the directory and
virus that AVG couldn't move).

Too soon old, too late smart

Gee, do these threads ever die of old age or do they simply keep
resurfacing?


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

Jim Hampton wrote:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...

In article , Mike Coslo writes:


What?! how can this be? First is interpretation. Regardless of the
reasons that some may have for a different answer, there has to be a
reference somewhere. And the nice thing about the question pool is that
you can see the answer that is wanted. Then the person taking the test
can decide whether they want to put in the desired answer, purposely
put in an answer that will be marked wrong, or argue with the test giver.

So NOT having a open question pool is going to cause trouble.

No "interpretation" is allowed in here, Mike.

Public disclosure of the amateur radio question pool (with answers)
has been deemed, variously, "dumbing down," "cheating," and
(probably) "unpatriotic." It is an evil that must be eradicated. :-)

All things on the amateur test must be kept the way it was for the
olde fartes...closed book, prim, proper, very very formal. The rest of
their life depends on the test outcome. It's the most important thing
in their lives and MUST be treated that way!

Might be fun to conjecture on your try at a real discussion. It would
meet with the usual hate-spew of certain creatures in here, though,
and quickly evaporate into the bit-bucket.

I've taken a few tests, both open-book and closed-book, neither of
which conditions bother me. The biggest "test" I've ever taken is
the continuing "test" of working for a living in electronics design.
Some of the time that work couldn't be either open- or closed-book;
no book existed to yield the "proper answers." :-)

LHA / WMD



Hello, Len


I guess, as in most things, "it all depends..."

Let's assume a newly minted extra class licensee. He/she knows the
(listed) answer as to what an emitter follower is. He/she also can
perform a simple math calculation as to what voltage will result (with
no current draw) at a tap in a voltage divider.

After a couple of years of on-air experience, he/she applies for a
tech job. There is a simple test to take to see if you understand
simple electronics. He/she is presented a very simple schematic of an
emitter follower with an open input (of course, a simple bias network
gives an appropriate voltage/current to the base) and an open output.
As can be expected, there is a resistor from ground to the emitter and
a resistor from the collector to +12 V. The questions a

1) what is the dc voltage at the output of the circuit?
2) What is the voltage at the collector of the transistor?

Assumptions are made that the transistor in question has a reasonably
high beta and they aren't looking for perfection anyways; just an
answer that would reasonably be seen if you stuck a digital meter on
the output.

If they answer the question, one can assume that they actually know
the material.

Of course, if the answer is that one wants the license only to "talk",
then the whole problem is moot. If you examine this newsgroup, you
will find a lot of code-tested amateurs, non-code tested amateurs, and
non-licensed folks that can not only talk, but argue up a storm

Whew! I'm back, finally, after changing ISPs and having a problem for
a week with my browser. Turned out there was a trojan dropper hanging
in an old abandoned folder and I kept getting hit with trojans locking
up the browser! Ad-aware, Spybot search and destroy, and AVG finally
cured the thing (with a brief boot to DOS to delete the directory and
virus that AVG couldn't move).

Welcome back! I was wondering what happened to you OM.


Too soon old, too late smart

Gee, do these threads ever die of old age or do they simply keep
resurfacing?

Nahh, their our old toys in th ecloset, and we tak 'em out once in a
while to beat 'em. 8^)


- Mike KB3EIA -

In article ,
(Jim Hampton) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


I guess, as in most things, "it all depends..."

Let's assume a newly minted extra class licensee. He/she knows the
(listed) answer as to what an emitter follower is. He/she also can
perform a simple math calculation as to what voltage will result (with
no current draw) at a tap in a voltage divider.

After a couple of years of on-air experience, he/she applies for a
tech job. There is a simple test to take to see if you understand
simple electronics. He/she is presented a very simple schematic of an
emitter follower with an open input (of course, a simple bias network
gives an appropriate voltage/current to the base) and an open output.
As can be expected, there is a resistor from ground to the emitter and
a resistor from the collector to +12 V. The questions a

1) what is the dc voltage at the output of the circuit?
2) What is the voltage at the collector of the transistor?

Assumptions are made that the transistor in question has a reasonably
high beta and they aren't looking for perfection anyways; just an
answer that would reasonably be seen if you stuck a digital meter on
the output.

If they answer the question, one can assume that they actually know
the material.

Of course, if the answer is that one wants the license only to "talk",
then the whole problem is moot. If you examine this newsgroup, you
will find a lot of code-tested amateurs, non-code tested amateurs, and
non-licensed folks that can not only talk, but argue up a storm

Okay. I see that a lot in rec.radio.amateur.homebrew. Talk.

Could have laid it out on the bench and DONE it with quick and
dirty prototype in the time required to argue. :-)

Whew! I'm back, finally, after changing ISPs and having a problem for
a week with my browser. Turned out there was a trojan dropper hanging
in an old abandoned folder and I kept getting hit with trojans locking
up the browser! Ad-aware, Spybot search and destroy, and AVG finally
cured the thing (with a brief boot to DOS to delete the directory and
virus that AVG couldn't move).

Too soon old, too late smart

Sometimes the only way to survive is to drop to primitive level and
Reformat the HD! :-)

Heh, I cheated and got an HP Pavilion box. Got a 17" TFT LCD
display too as the old 6 1/2 year CRT display bit the dust in the
horizontal sweep. I care not to bother repairing it. Recycle. The
TFT is like wonderful to the eyes. :-)

Gee, do these threads ever die of old age or do they simply keep
resurfacing?

Nope. They are as ageless as the old wounds of the passionate
arguers can continue to hurt! :-)

Some just have to keep on with the re-runs of old arguments, hoping
they might win one on the eleventieth hundred go around...

Their original points MUST be made! :-)

LHA / WMD

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

I question how the question pool is so much worse of a learning tool
than say a book.

Depends what you mean by "better" and "worse", Mike.

Here's something to try.

Let us take a website:

http://www.ewh.ieee.org/reg/7/millen...scientist.html

This is IEEE's write-up on Reginald Fessenden.

Let's take a situation where there is a question on the first date of
transmitted sound.

Quoting from the page:

Professor Kintner, who was working for Fessenden at that time,
designed an interrupter to give 10,000 breaks a second, and this
interrupter was built by Brashear, an optician. The interrupter was
delivered in January or February 1900, but experiments were not
conducted until the fall of that year. To modulate his transmitter,
he inserted a carbon microphone directly in series with the antenna
lead. After many unsuccessful tries, transmission of speech over a
distance of 1.5 km was finally achieved on 23 December 1900, between
15-metre masts located at Cobb Island, Maryland.

A couple paragraphs later....

Fessenden's greatest radio communications successes happened in 1906.
On 10 January, two-way transatlantic telegraphic communication
was achieved -- another first – between Brant Rock, Massachusetts,
and Macrihanish, Scotland. James C. Armor, Fessenden's chief assistant,
was the operator at Macrihanish, and Fessenden himself was the operator
at Brant Rock.

End quote

OK.

There are some questions that may be easily taken from these paragraphs.

When was the date of the first successful voice transmission?

A. July 15, 1905

B. December 1, 1899

C. December 23, 1900

D. January 10, 1906

Some place you can look up the answer = C

What was the distance of the first transmission?

A. 1.5 Kilometers

B. 1.5 miles

C. Transatlantic

D. 5 meters

Some place you can look up the answer = A

Okay. So which is the superior method?

Depends what you mean by "superior".

If someone who knows nothing about Fessenden discovers that there are only two
Fessenden questions in the pool, he/she need only learn two simple facts
("first voice transmission date = 1900" and "first voice transmission distance
= 1.5 km = about 1 mile".

But if a question pool is not available, the person has to learn a whole lot
more because there's no telling what Fessenden questions, or how many, will be
on the test.

If I were to voice my preferences, I would just as soon read a nice
story about Mr. Fessenden than a dry question pool. But functionally the
two are identical.

Not really. Heck, I could write at least a dozen different questions from those
paragraphs.

Should the answers to the question pool be some deep hidden tome, not
accessible to the public?

Nope.

The *exact questions* should be secret! But that's not going to happen any time
soon, so why get worked up over it?

As much as the two methods are pretty much the
same, I would only agree with that if no one was allowed to study *any*
reference material *at all*. Reading the two paragraphs gives you the
*exact* same answers as looking at a question pool.

Not really.

If we know the exact Q&A in this hypothetical question pool, the whole story
that started out like this:

Professor Kintner, who was working for Fessenden at that time,
designed an interrupter to give 10,000 breaks a second, and this
interrupter was built by Brashear, an optician. The interrupter was
delivered in January or February 1900, but experiments were not
conducted until the fall of that year. To modulate his transmitter,
he inserted a carbon microphone directly in series with the antenna
lead. After many unsuccessful tries, transmission of speech over a
distance of 1.5 km was finally achieved on 23 December 1900, between
15-metre masts located at Cobb Island, Maryland.

A couple paragraphs later....

Fessenden's greatest radio communications successes happened in 1906.
On 10 January, two-way transatlantic telegraphic communication
was achieved -- another first – between Brant Rock, Massachusetts,
and Macrihanish, Scotland. James C. Armor, Fessenden's chief assistant,
was the operator at Macrihanish, and Fessenden himself was the operator
at Brant Rock.

End quote

Boils down to this:

transmission of speech over a
distance of 1.5 km was finally achieved on 23 December 1900

I'll take having to study the second over having to study the first any day.

Finally, I deliberately included this particular material and this
specific question because of a current disagreement between to members
of the group.

Do you see Len admitting he's wrong, even when IEEE says so?

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

I question how the question pool is so much worse of a learning tool
than say a book.

Depends what you mean by "better" and "worse", Mike.


Some types of questions can only be answered by rote memorization of the
material. This includes band limits and other rules and regs.

On the other hand, some material is best learned by actually studying the
material to understand the basis of the question. This includes things like
the length of a quarter wave antenna for HF work as an example. If you
memorize the answers to the questions, you will be out in the cold if you
need to make an antenna for a different frequency than was on the test. If
you study the material, you will learn (memorize) the equation and be able
to calculate the length for any frequency. In addition, you read why
quarter wave antennas work, not needed for the test and it makes it easier
to remember (or memorize) the actual equation, which means you can pass
questions on quarter wave antenna length no matter what frequency is chosen
as happens when they revise the question pool.

Mike, you stated that you studied the question pool and looked up reference
material on those you missed or didn't understand. This is NOT the same as
just studying the question pool. You didn't simply memorize the answers to
the questions. You went for the underlying basis of the material. This
latter is functionally equivalent to studying from a book. What this did
was let you focus on those areas where you needed more work and skip the
reference material on sections that you already knew or were easy for you.
This is radically different than just studying the question pool.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE