10-03-2018, 05:41 PM
How do newcomers become radio amateurs?
At the 2002 WIA Convention, a visitor from the RSGB, Geoffrey Booth G8DZJ as I recall, described the RSGBs new education system. At that time, the Australian system had 5 levels. Morse was on its way out world-wide; without Morse, the Australian system would devolve to three levels. The RSGB system had three levels, and its lowest level was below Australias entry level - a ready-made, new, entry course, Woo Hoo!
Education in the UK is based on the Education Act of 1870, which was really a way of saving children from death by factory. It is a competitive system, based on Teaching Objectives. Your achievement was measured by closed-book responses in a fixed time - so, it measured recall and literacy, rather than technical knowledge. You got graded outcome levels, like FAIL, PASS, CREDIT
In 1990, TAFE was pioneering Competency-based Training (CBT); it was another form of competitive education, this time with only two outcomes - Competent or Not Yet Competent. Assessment did not require a fixed time. Competence was demonstrated by your getting a certain percentage of the Learning Outcomes correct.
Note: Teaching Objectives are what the teacher wants to achieve; Learning Outcomes are what students want to achieve. Theyre seldom the same.
Ron Smith, VK4AGS (now SK) was also at that 2002 Convention. He was the WIA Federal Education Co-ordinator and ran the Education column in AR mag for several years till his untimely death. As a senior lecturer in engineering at UCQ, Ron had hands-on experience with Problem-Based Learning (PBL). He sent me many PBL research papers from teaching colleagues around the world - I found strong resonance: For my motor vehicle racing licence, my peers, on the track at the same time as me, assessed me. When doing my MBA at UNSW, my fellow students assessed me in some subjects. During my research in hospitals, I saw budding clinicians assessed by their peers. While training to be a Lawn Tennis coach, once again, I was assessed by my peers. Under PBL, the teacher is really a facilitator; students decide their own learning outcomes and methods, and their peers assess them - hence, the Learning and Assessment go together; PBL is a co-operative system. Research shows that students set and attain higher levels of competence than in the monolithic-classroom model. Another beauty of PBL is that students can choose their own areas of expertise - whether EME, ATV, SatComms, SDR, FT-8, JT65, Morse, RTTY, construction ... or ... camouflaged back-hand top-spin lob??
By 2004 we had three models - the RSGBs, TAFEs CBT and PBL. Whether due diligence was done on any, I dont know, but the WIA bought the RSGBs system and persuaded the ACA, it was a good thing. The WIA set up a Registered Training Organisation to administer this new system of Education and Assessment - allegedly along CBT lines, but with the UK notion of knowledge questions answered closed-book within a fixed time.
Any modern-day teacher can tell you that the present syllabus really just lists of teaching plan topics - is not equivalent to CBT Learning Outcomes. The present three-tier, linear model offers a single path to a hilltop that few new radio amateurs seek. Just look at the conversion rates from Foundation to Standard or Advanced. Some believe that 3 levels provide an incentive for candidates to access more bands and use more power. Did anyone ask candidates whether they saw graded levels as an incentive, or wanted the extra bands and power??
The theory in the present Foundation learning material pre-dates Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg and Planck - but who needs atomic theory anyway? Is a radio amateur going to design a BJT, a FET or an IC? And there is not a skerrick of computing or digital comms at any AOCP level.
The new system has one benefit - new candidates for all levels must demonstrate practical ability to connect up a radio, and proper communication protocols. However, along with these safety-style items are open-book Regulations knowledge items that pen and paper, multi-guess could test, rather than invigilated surveillance of page turning.
In summary, I believe that we need to change the Learning Outcomes and the modes of Learning and Assessment: the present antediluvian syllabus needs flexibility and relevance Learning and Assessment must go hand in hand.
73 from Brian, VK2GCE.
From text edition for March 11 2018 - VK NATIONAL NEWS BROADCAST ON VK1WIA : http://www.wia.org.au/members/broadcast/wianews/
Also in MP3 edition of news available at: http://www.wia-files.com/podcast/wianews-2018-03-11.mp3
At the 2002 WIA Convention, a visitor from the RSGB, Geoffrey Booth G8DZJ as I recall, described the RSGBs new education system. At that time, the Australian system had 5 levels. Morse was on its way out world-wide; without Morse, the Australian system would devolve to three levels. The RSGB system had three levels, and its lowest level was below Australias entry level - a ready-made, new, entry course, Woo Hoo!
Education in the UK is based on the Education Act of 1870, which was really a way of saving children from death by factory. It is a competitive system, based on Teaching Objectives. Your achievement was measured by closed-book responses in a fixed time - so, it measured recall and literacy, rather than technical knowledge. You got graded outcome levels, like FAIL, PASS, CREDIT
In 1990, TAFE was pioneering Competency-based Training (CBT); it was another form of competitive education, this time with only two outcomes - Competent or Not Yet Competent. Assessment did not require a fixed time. Competence was demonstrated by your getting a certain percentage of the Learning Outcomes correct.
Note: Teaching Objectives are what the teacher wants to achieve; Learning Outcomes are what students want to achieve. Theyre seldom the same.
Ron Smith, VK4AGS (now SK) was also at that 2002 Convention. He was the WIA Federal Education Co-ordinator and ran the Education column in AR mag for several years till his untimely death. As a senior lecturer in engineering at UCQ, Ron had hands-on experience with Problem-Based Learning (PBL). He sent me many PBL research papers from teaching colleagues around the world - I found strong resonance: For my motor vehicle racing licence, my peers, on the track at the same time as me, assessed me. When doing my MBA at UNSW, my fellow students assessed me in some subjects. During my research in hospitals, I saw budding clinicians assessed by their peers. While training to be a Lawn Tennis coach, once again, I was assessed by my peers. Under PBL, the teacher is really a facilitator; students decide their own learning outcomes and methods, and their peers assess them - hence, the Learning and Assessment go together; PBL is a co-operative system. Research shows that students set and attain higher levels of competence than in the monolithic-classroom model. Another beauty of PBL is that students can choose their own areas of expertise - whether EME, ATV, SatComms, SDR, FT-8, JT65, Morse, RTTY, construction ... or ... camouflaged back-hand top-spin lob??
By 2004 we had three models - the RSGBs, TAFEs CBT and PBL. Whether due diligence was done on any, I dont know, but the WIA bought the RSGBs system and persuaded the ACA, it was a good thing. The WIA set up a Registered Training Organisation to administer this new system of Education and Assessment - allegedly along CBT lines, but with the UK notion of knowledge questions answered closed-book within a fixed time.
Any modern-day teacher can tell you that the present syllabus really just lists of teaching plan topics - is not equivalent to CBT Learning Outcomes. The present three-tier, linear model offers a single path to a hilltop that few new radio amateurs seek. Just look at the conversion rates from Foundation to Standard or Advanced. Some believe that 3 levels provide an incentive for candidates to access more bands and use more power. Did anyone ask candidates whether they saw graded levels as an incentive, or wanted the extra bands and power??
The theory in the present Foundation learning material pre-dates Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg and Planck - but who needs atomic theory anyway? Is a radio amateur going to design a BJT, a FET or an IC? And there is not a skerrick of computing or digital comms at any AOCP level.
The new system has one benefit - new candidates for all levels must demonstrate practical ability to connect up a radio, and proper communication protocols. However, along with these safety-style items are open-book Regulations knowledge items that pen and paper, multi-guess could test, rather than invigilated surveillance of page turning.
In summary, I believe that we need to change the Learning Outcomes and the modes of Learning and Assessment: the present antediluvian syllabus needs flexibility and relevance Learning and Assessment must go hand in hand.
73 from Brian, VK2GCE.
From text edition for March 11 2018 - VK NATIONAL NEWS BROADCAST ON VK1WIA : http://www.wia.org.au/members/broadcast/wianews/
Also in MP3 edition of news available at: http://www.wia-files.com/podcast/wianews-2018-03-11.mp3
Doug VK4ADC @ QG62LG51
http://www.vk4adc.com
This Forum is only going to be as interesting as the posts it contains.
If you have a comment or question, post it as it may trigger or answer the query in someone else's mind.
http://www.vk4adc.com
This Forum is only going to be as interesting as the posts it contains.
If you have a comment or question, post it as it may trigger or answer the query in someone else's mind.