[Boatanchors] Upgrade question

[Jim Wiley]

Long message follows:


Let me see if I can offer some assistance here. 


The only remaining "instant upgrade" path is for persons who held a 
Technician class license issued on or before March 21, 1987.  If you do, 
and are still licensed (or expired less than 2 years), you can upgrade 
to General class without further exam.  All remaining no-exam upgrade 
paths, for any other class of license,  have expired.  Specifically, 
there is no way to obtain an upgrade to Extra class without 
examination.  You must take and pass the Element 4 exam to upgrade to 
Extra.


The question pools for all amateur radio exams (Tech, General, and 
Extra) are available from the ARRL, as someone said.  Log on to the ARRL 
web site (www.arrl.org),  and go to the tab labeled "Licensing", then to 
"Exams", then to "Exam Question Pools".  On that page you will find all 
3 current pools, as well as lists of withdrawn questions.  The withdrawn 
questions have been physically removed from the files, so there should 
be no confusion. 


The pools are also available from the NCVEC web site (www.ncvec.org).  
If using that site, click on "Amateur Question Pools" at the left side 
of the page, then on whichever pool you need.  The pools and any 
necessary graphics (schematics, charts, etc.) are available there.


Free practice exams are available from a number of sources.   QRZ.com is 
one, but my favorite is the AA9PW site (www.aa9pw.com).  His site 
includes a Morse code generator for practice if you are so inclined.  
The exams on the AA9PW site are computer generated (questions are picked 
at random from each section of the pool), so each test is unique.  There 
is no fixed number that represents how many practice exams a person has 
to take to see "all" of the questions in exam form.  This may be true of 
other practice sites as well, but I have not tested them.


The advantage to the ARRL study guide is that each question is 
accompanied by a detailed discussion that explains the background 
theory, thus giving the student a much more thorough base of 
understanding of what is being asked.  The Gordon West study guides are 
similar, but the background material tends to be substantially more 
terse.   The ARRL guides are almost "mini-handbooks" for each subject 
discussed.


In any case, be sure you are using current materials and study guides 
when getting ready for the exams.  The Extra Class pool was updated 
recently, and the current version became effective on July 12 of this 
year.  It is vitally important to make sure the pool and study material 
is current.   While some questions are re-used from previous pools, 
there are enough changes between pool releases that using obsolete study 
material will seriously compromise the chances of passing the exam. 


Each pool is effective for a minimum of 4 years from date of release 
unless unusual circumstances require a revision to the schedule - which 
was the case for the most recent "cycle".  However, the pools should now 
be back "on track" for at least the next several years. 


We are working on the update for the Tech pool at this time, and the new 
version will become effective  July 1, 2010. 


Since I happen to be a member of the Question Pool Committee, you can 
send suggestions for new questions and revisions to existing material to 
me, and I will make sure it gets proper consideration.  Keep in mind 
that we are limited in how much text space a question can use (210 
characters max) and how much each of the 4 possible "answers" can use 
(140 characters). 


The question pool committee always needs and welcomes new material.  
Although you wouldn't think it so sometimes, one of our biggest problems 
is getting hams to submit material for possible use.  We ask and ask, 
but we only very seldom receive. Of course, not all material submitted 
can be used, sometimes because we already have questions on a topic (but 
better ones are always wanted)  or the submission is unsuitable for some 
other reason, but I will guarantee all submissions are carefully 
considered.  Keep in mind that proposed new questions need to apply to 
the entire country.  We have received any number of questions that are 
otherwise great questions, but unfortunately apply to only a specific 
part of the country or reflect operating practices in just a few states.


One final note, this time about the Morse Code.    We have had several 
months now to evaluate the results of removing the exam requirement of 
being able to copy the code as a pre-requisite for obtaining an amateur 
radio license.  Actual surveys of the HF bands have indicated that there 
is a noticeably higher number of stations using  CW now than there were 
before the requirement was removed.  Also, sales of Morse code practice 
materials from the ARRL and other sources are substantially up from the 
period before the code requirement was removed.  Many beginning hams  
(not all, of course) have expressed that learning CW was very high on 
their list of  things they wanted to accomplish.  Oddly enough, it looks 
very much as if the trend towards acquiring CW skills is much more 
prevalent in younger hams than with older adults.


I would ask you to remember that CW was not and will not (in the 
foreseeable future) be made "illegal".  All that was done was to remove 
the requirement for testing on this mode.    Also, keep in mind that the 
group that wrote the original petition to remove code testing from the 
exam syllabus were all "20 WPM Extra Class" license holders, and all 4 
held (or could qualify for) a CW only DXCC - so they were not just 
casual operators.    I know.   I was one of them.   And, believe it or 
not, CW is one of my favorite modes! 


We just could not see how forcing people to exhibit CW skills made them 
better hams.  It surely was not working as a "filter" to keep  poor 
operators off the bands - look at the trash that was and is still on 75 
meters -  and prior to 2006, each and every one of those people had 
passed a code test!  Also, consider that the ham bands have absolutely 
not become "instant CB".  Are there some bad operators?  Of course there 
are.  Lids  have always been an unfortunate part of ham radio.  But, are 
there more "bad apples" than there were before "no code"?  I don't think 
so.


Why do newcomers want to learn CW?   There are a number of reasons we 
have heard, but the main ones seem to fall into 3 categories:   First, 
because it is "cool" - newcomers want to have a "secret" skill that 
their CB buddies and Cell-phone toting peers are excluded from.  Second, 
because these same newcomers quickly realize that not having CW skills 
shuts them out of many interesting parts of the hobby.  Working DX is 
substantially easier on CW, believe it or not, and there are still many 
hams in less affluent parts of the world who are on CW only.  Similarly, 
CW is pretty much a required skill for some modes, such as meteor 
scatter or EME, or other types of experimental or weak signal work.  
Lastly, as is well known, home-made equipment, either from kits or from 
"scratch"  is significantly easier to build when CW is the mode of 
operation.


We have all heard the arguments about how CW will get through when 
nothing else will.  Up until recently, that was true.   But times have 
changed.  Recent developments have given us some modes that take 
advantage of special detection techniques and use computer assisted 
signal processing that will reach down into the noise and recover 
signals that would be literally undetectable by the human ear - and yes, 
this includes specialized signals such as ultra-slow CW as well.   Also, 
as previously stated, it is undeniably true that a CW station can be 
assembled from much less complex equipment, and at less cost, than other 
modes. However, very few hams, alas, build their own equipment these days. 


Finally, keep in mind that in recent years, by actual count, the numbers 
of stations using CW during actual emergencies  has dropped to virtually 
zero when compared to SSB, VHF FM, and digital modes.  Not actually 
zero, of course, which is more than enough reason for all hams to have 
this skill in their "toolbox" of abilities, but undeniably much much 
less important than it was 30 or 50 years ago.  There have been several 
recent (within the past 5 years or so) situations where major 
emergencies have been handled without a single report - that's right, 
not one - of a message being passed via CW.


Finally, a word about the question pools themselves.  I agree that we no 
longer use the fill in the blank format for exams. Such a format would 
be impractical for exams given via computer, which is the case for most 
exams given today.  The reason that the pool, and the answers, are 
published is because of the "Dick Bash" (sp?)   phenomenon.  Back when 
the FCC gave the exams, there were, believe it or not, only 2 or at most 
3 versions of the exam in use for each element.  This was the main 
reason a person had to wait at least 30 days before re-testing!


Mr. Bash managed, by various means, to obtain copies of all of the 
exams, and for a cash "donation" would sell them to  parties who wanted 
to cheat on the exam .  By requiring that the pools contain at least 10 
times more questions than would appear on any exam, the problem of 
memorizing the answers was made much more difficult.  Not impossible, 
just more difficult. 


However, let me pose this question to those of you that abhor this way 
of handling the exams:  If a person can memorize all the questions, and 
all their correct answers, for each of the pools, would not that make 
them fairly knowledgeable on the basic skills required to operate a 
station?  Yes or no?   Not expert,  by any means,  but  at least knowing 
what and what not to do.


What is the purpose of an exam?  Is it to teach electronics, or to 
determine if the applicant possesses the knowledge required to operate 
his or her station legally, efficiently, and with a minimum of 
interference to other users?  Not that possessing such knowledge 
guarantees such will happen - human beings being what they are, 
miscreants are still part of life.  


I too took my exams "back in the day" when I had to appear before the 
"Gods" at the FCC, and waited nervously for 6 weeks before finding out 
whether I had passed or not.  And let me assure you, each of those 
exams, both ham and commercial, was "scary" and I was very nervous, at 
the time.   But, I passed them all,  ham and commercial, without ever 
failing an element, not even one.  Ended up with an Extra Class ham and 
a First Class Radiotelephone with Ship Radar endorsement, plus a 2nd 
class telegraph.  (Couldn't go for the 1st telegraph because there was 
no way for me to get the required time on board ship or at a coast 
station).


As I look back on those exams from the "other end" of  50 years of 
gaining knowledge one step at a time, they too seem "easy" to me - but I 
can assure you the current exams are not considered "easy" by those 
taking the tests.  If you have been active in the industry for many 
years, any exam can seem easy in light of  your experience, but try 
this:  Make a truly honest try at imagining taking those same exams with 
absolutely none of that background to help you - 'taint the same thing, 
is it? 


Now, before you start the "flames" - take a moment to re-read this 
message and see if you don't actually agree with what I have written. 


Jim, KL7CC
Member, NCVEC Question Pool Committee






Glen Zook wrote:
> But the additional privileges are well worth the "loss of status"!
>
> Glen, K9STH
>
> Website:  http://k9sth.com
>
>
> --- On Fri, 9/12/08, Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> From: Jim Haynes <jhhaynes at earthlink.net>
>
> Actually there is a reason to keep the Advanced license, as it proves you passed a Morse Code test.
>
>
>       
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>