Problems with Testing and Examinations
Let's look at our testing procedure as it is now implemented. All of the questions and answers to the different test elements are public information. Most people that see our current system as flawed believe that this public information question pool is in itself the flaw. We don't necessarily believe that to be true.

The intent of the question pool system was two things: 1) To eliminate any inequity in determining the final outcome of a test. If all applicants are given tests that are made up of questions that are known in advance by anyone who cares to look them up, then inequity has been eliminated. 2) To lessen the burden placed upon examiners in administering and grading the tests. Multiple choice tests provide for the quickest and most accurate grading system.

OK, so if all the questions and answers are public information, then how can that be considered a test? A person can just memorize the published question pools, and pass any test with ease. This is the common argument against the question pool system. Well, that situation is addressed in the FCC rules of Part 97. 97.523 "...Each question pool must contain at least 10 times the number of questions required for a single examination..." With that being the case, if an applicant were to take, say a 30 question test, he'd have to memorize at least 300 questions to ace the test, or at least 210 questions in order to pass with a minimum grade. That's a lot of material to memorize, even just to squeak by minimally. As a matter of fact, if a person were to memorize that amount of material, they couldn't perhaps help but to have learned something about the actual subject material! Sounds like an adequate system.

What then is the problem? The problem is that the current question pools adhere only to the letter of the law, but most definitely not the intent! What I mean by that is that when part 97.523 was written, it was intended that each question, even if it covers the exact same material as another question, will have a significantly different answer. Our current question pools have multiple versions of exactly the same question!

I'll give an example from the Extra question pool. There are three questions, one and only one of these three will be on any single test, that are all answered with the same response, "one time constant". They appear to be different questions because one is asking about an RC circuit's charging time, the next is about an RL circuit's charging time, and the third is about the discharge time of an RC circuit. They aren't really electronic questions at all because all you need to know is that if you see a set of answers that contain the answer "one time constant", you know that that is the correct answer. You don't even need to read the question to know the answer!

That is just one specific example. All of the question pools are set up in this way. It is in fact possible to teach a person methods of remembering all the correct answers without bothering to know any of the theory! With the current question pools, it is rarely necessary to memorize more than about twice the number of questions on a test, and probably less than that! If you carefully analyze the question pools, it becomes obvious that the pools are carefully set up in order to make passing easy, even if the subject matter is not well understood by the examinee.

Since the intent of what seemed to be a very straightforward law is being skirted in order to make the tests easier to pass, it is evident that we must strengthen that law! We must not imply the intent, but define it. 97.523 should read, ...Each question pool must contain at least 10 times the number of questions required for a single examination. Each of the questions, even when covering the same or similar topic material as another question, must have a distinctly different answer from any other question in a single question pool... This would eliminate the easy memorization method of passing the tests, thusly restoring integrity to the system.

Another problem that has crept into our system in just the last couple of years is the practice of allowing paid instructors to administer exams to their own students. Many of these instructors promise that you'll pass your exam with only one weekend of intense study, or your money back! Can you see the obvious conflict of interest there? If I charge my students say, one-hundred fifty bucks, and one of them fails the test, that's one-hundred fifty bucks straight out of my pocket! In that case, wouldn't you expect that I'd do anything I can get away with to make sure that none of my students fail!

This, I believe, was an oversight. The rules were changed recently to allow people who worked for companies who make amateur equipment, and testing literature, eligible to be Volunteer Examiners. Before this rules change, a great number of people that would otherwise qualify to be VEs could not do so because they built radio related equipment, or worked for a company that published study material for amateur testing. Once again, a well intended rule has been poorly worded and taken advantage of in the worst way! We need to add to the VE rules in Part 97 a restriction prohibiting a paid instructor, or his employees and affiliates from testing their own students! This must become law! To ignore this problem is, in effect, selling Ham Licenses!

One method that I have personally seen in use by one of these "licensing schools" is that they will teach one specific version of a test, and then administer that same test to their students at the end of the class. What I mean is that the students will be taught the exact questions and answers that they will see on their test! Not the theory they are supposed to know, but the exact questions that will be on their test! Their instructor knows what questions to teach, because he is the one giving the test! I've seen this myself! When this was brought to the attention of the the Volunteer Examiner Coordinator that was involved, The response from the VEC was, "Prove it!"! This practice is, even with our current rules, illegal. 97.509(e) "No VE may administer or certify any examination by fraudulent means or for monetary or other consideration including reimbursement in any amount in excess of that permitted..." The problem is, the laws covering VE conduct are set up in such a way as to protect the VE from scrutiny. It is nearly impossible to gain any useable evidence when test examination fraud is going on!

Now, what I've addressed so far is concerned only with the method used to administer exams concerning theory. I will not pretend that I alone am qualified to decide what topics should be covered on a theory examination for any class of amateur license, or in what proportion those topics should appear on a test. That area should be covered by the true radio electronics experts, but only after the system is fixed as outlined above!

Next, I will address the problems with the Morse Code examinations. A Morse Code test is a skill test. It should not be possible to pass a test of skill using deductive reasoning, or guessing. Both methods are possible with a multiple choice, or I might say multiple guess test! This testing method must therefore be eliminated. There should be only one method of passing a code test. That should be one minute of solid copy, and at least one minute of solid flawless sending. This leaves no doubt whatsoever that the applicant has true code proficiency at the required speed and has legitimately passed the exam. To allow more than one grading method means that there could be inequities between tests administered at different sites. This should be defined in law!

Classes of License
That pretty much covers what needs to be done to repair the dysfunctional system that we now have for Amateur service testing. I think we should also take a look at the various license classes that we have now. These six levels do not seem to provide a smooth upward movement in skills as an incentive program should. I think also, that the names given to each of the various levels of license should be chosen carefully. Each license should have a name that conveys a specific meaning, not just an arbitrary name for the sake of having a name. The name should fit the level of skill and dedication required to obtain the license it represents.

The no-code license should be the entry level, and should, appropriately, be called "Novice". This would be the same skill level, and privileges as our current no-code license. The entry level for HF would be the Technician, and would be basically the same as the technician license was prior to the existence of the no-code license. A slow-code general, with the same skills as a general class licensee, but only a 5 wpm code test.

In other words, I'm suggesting that we eliminate our "current" Novice license, as it now exists. The "Novice bands" would become the "Technician bands". These would be for anyone who wanted HF privileges, but only had a 5 wpm code speed. Some data privileges would be allowed for the Technicians within the Technician HF bands. These people would already have passed, as a requirement, the "Novice" test. What that means is that everyone in the Amateur Service would have full VHF and higher frequency privileges with the no-code "Novice" license being the basic starting point for everyone. Some might leap immediately to the Technician license to gain phone privileges but, that is their choice. They would be cheating themselves of the knowledge and inculcation they would gain by this better sequential process but, that is their choice too!

I don't think that phone privileges should be allowed below the General level. The addition of data privileges to the existing Technician HF privileges would give these licensees a lot more operating freedom, but still hold phone operation as an incentive to upgrade. And, asking that one improve their iCW skills as a standard for upgrade is not an unreasonable demand. iCW is a communication skill that is useful to any weak signal operator. This is true in any portion of spectrum. It's a simple case of signal to noise ratio. You won't find a narrower mode, and therefore, iCW is the best mode for extremely weak signal work. A true Ham is a person who continually strives to improve their communications skills, and I think that includes iCW!

The upgrade from Technician to Technician-Plus would only require that a 10 wpm code test be passed. That's right, 10 wpm! So, the Technician-Plus licensees would be the same as Technicians as far as theory is concerned, but with twice the code speed. The next step up the ranks would be the Scientific class. This would replace the former "Advanced" license and would stress the conceptual ideas relating to how radio actually works. It would delve into propagation theory, antennas as L/C circuits, and overall be a condensed model of what Ham Radio is defined as, tied up in one pretty package! It would require more technical knowledge with the emphasis on conceptual thinking, and also a 15 wpm code test.

Finally, the Engineer class would replace the former Extra license. It would require the most stringent technical test of them all, and a 20 wpm code test. When I say stringent technical test, I don't mean that it should have a few advanced electronic topics covered, and be mostly a Volunteer Examiner's entry test like the current Extra either! I mean serious electronics and radio theory covering concepts of radio, and also radio engineering theory! It would speak to the desire of those who really want to learn and become good at the radio art. It would involve a testing process that assures a mind that is geared up and suited to improvement. A mind and spirit that says, OK, here's the problem I'm having with this darn radio, amplifier, transverter, postulate etc., now how do I deal with it?".

As you can see, this plan would consist of 5 license classes: Novice, Technician, Technician Plus, Scientific, and Engineer

It would be relatively simple to enact in terms of not making for burdensome or expensive changes within the FCC's governmental structure and subsequent legal changes.

Novice: Equivalent to our current No-Code Technician in privileges.

This license level would be geared so as to be a welcoming initiation into the basics of Amateur (Ham) Radio. It should involve a relatively simple examination of about 20 questions that cover the basics in terms of rules and regulations.

Technician: Equivalent to our Technicians as they were prior to the No-Code license, but with data privileges added on the HF Technician sub-bands.

This test would also be a relatively simple exam. It would be geared to a better conceptual understanding of the radio practice, and contain a larger quantity of questions so as to establish a threshold of what might be called "sweat equity". This sweat equity is a basic tenet in this sort of proposal scheme. It would insure that each grade of license has a true and respectable value!

Technician Plus: Equivalent to our current General, but only a 10 wpm code requirement.

Ten words per minute was the requirement for this license in decades past. A test involving this sort of skill proficiency that tests both sending and receiving can only be passed by those who hold, and truly want to attain the requisite skill! This license would become a highly desired license by the younger technologic set!

All tests in these three above levels would be geared and oriented towards improving the numbers of qualified Hams, and would be specifically oriented toward bringing younger fresher minds into our ranks!

Scientific: Equivalent to our current Advanced with an emphasis toward conceptual knowledge, but with a 15 wpm code requirement.

A main intent and provision of this class of license would be to define a "breakpoint" in the level of license and knowledge shown. It would not denigrate the previous classes but, would exemplify and propound a higher recognized standard. It would probably be the license held by the greatest number of Hams of at least a few years tenure. This standard would test for a proficiency in the range of skills known, and also that these skills are propounded in the basic scientific premise of Amateur Radio!

Engineer: Equivalent to our current Extra, but more emphasis will be placed on both conceptual and state of the art engineering practice than our current license!

We think it is generally appreciated that in our technical and technologic world, different levels of skill and understanding exist. The intent of this license, and its exam, would seek to demonstrate the highest and broadest level of this understanding. It would have the best privileges attached to it, and would prove true honest proficiency!

This system would require 8 different testing elements. 4 different levels of Morse Code testing, and 4 different levels of theory. They would look like this:

2 = Novice theory exam (no code required)

This would be a rather simple test involving about 20 questions covering basic rules regulations, and just enough radio theory in a conceptual vain to wet the appetite. It would be geared or oriented to Jr. High school or Middle school age groups, as this is the age where people start "spreading their wings" pursuant to what they will do with their lives!
It is also the age group we need to appeal to statistically!

1a = Technician code exam - 5wpm
3 = Technician / Technician-Plus theory exam

The above class of "Technician" license lets you stick your toe in the waters of Ham Radio and see what it and all of its bands are about. Holding this license gives that licensee enough "warm fuzzies" to let him or her justify spending the bucks on one of the new MF/HF/VHF/UHF radios. It further encourages them to personally match their own skills to what that radio can do!

1b = Technician-Plus code exam - 10wpm

This Technician-Plus license and test as was stated would likely become the "general" or "typical" license most Hams would have. This license though would hopefully become a "transitional" step where through appropriate exams, and simply what these folks heard on the radio, they would be geared up to move on to at least the Scientific class of license.

1b = Advanced code exam - 15wpm
3 = Advanced theory exam

This "Scientific" license would be the reward and jewel for those who had achieved a pretty good level of expertise. It would be relatively painless to obtain for those who had a serious interest, and would have adequate rewards for displaying the knowledge skill and "sweat equity" they displayed to obtain it!

1d = Extra code exam - 20wpm
4 = Extra theory exam

This "Engineer" class of license would be the ultimate test and display of that equity each Ham should have and hold no matter which level they have attained. It would be the statement that says, "I am this good". It could be obtained by only those who have put in the skill and effort to really learn, or by only those who are just really bright! If this sounds harsh, that may be. We have though over the last several years fooled ourselves into giving each other rewards without earning them. The holders of this license would be able to prove their reward by showing their knowledge and skill!

Of course these new testing elements would have to be looked at carefully for content to insure that they properly represent the level of skill for each class of license. I think with the overhauled question pool system, and the new license structure that we are proposing, the Ham community could have a much better license system that is more fair, and would promote better levels of skill and understanding on the Amateur bands!