Changes to Foundation

In August 2018, the RSGB announced that a new, and tougher, entrance exam would be rolled out. According to the RSGB’s own stats, last year saw a significant drop in the number of newcomers, and in 2017, the newcomer count has hit a 12-year low.

The new exam will be harder to pass, and more worryingly, harder to teach – and as all trainers are volunteers, some may decide this is a good time to stop, whilst others will rise to the challenge. To cover the extra content, courses will have to become longer (and may be more expensive), and the new practical exercises introduced will likely require volunteers and training clubs to buy new equipment.

To me,  it’s not immediately obvious how, at a time of decline, rolling out an exam that’s harder to pass and harder to teach, will inspire more training and more candidates. These things are vital to growing the hobby and ensuring there are more people coming into the hobby, than ‘falling off’ at the other end.

For those not familiar with the change, one of the changes being discussed at length at the moment, is the introduction of resistors in series and parallel. For those with an interest in electronics or kit-building, this is a trivial piece of electronics. But for those looking to get into a radio hobby, it could be seen as a hurdle. Admittedly one that some will jump with ease, but others may fail to see why, at entry level, this is relevant for a communication hobby.

Resisting Resistors

Resistors used to sit nicely at the Intermediate level. Assuming you’ve done your Foundation, you’re introduced to construction and start with some basic circuits, leading to a kit. Most amateurs don’t progress onto construction, but they’ve got their licence, had an introduction, and have been informed of the important safety stuff, so the grounding is there for those who want to go down that route.

From 2019, newcomers can’t sit their exam until they’re competent with resistors and Ohm’s law, and can use a multimeter to measure current in an LED, and the changes when an additional resistor is added in parallel with the first. Nothing to do with radio, ridiculously basic if you’re into electronics, too basic to inspire candidates to get into the exciting world of making LEDs get brighter, and a bunch of hassle for under-resourced clubs.

Hobby Comparison

I quite like the idea of looking at this from the perspective of another hobby – For the sake of it – let’s take metal detecting as an easy example…

If I wanted to become a detectorist (I think I have that right), I’d expect a club to teach me how a detector works, techniques for good detecting, the legal side of where I can detect, how to be safe, and some basic theory on types of metals, etc.

For amateur radio, I’d expect to be taught how a radio works, techniques for good operating, the legal side of where I can transmit, safety stuff, and some basic theory on bands, propagation, kit, antennas, SWR, etc.

I would not expect to be told that I couldn’t use a metal detector unless I could calculate the current across two tiny components and a light (and nothing to do with metal detecting). Nor would I expect to have to draw diagrams of the internal workings of the detector, recite two electronics formulae, learn how to use a current meter, or recall the colours painted on some of the internal components on a pre-surface mount version of a detector.

Sure, some people may want to build their own metal detectors, or understand the scientific theory behind how they work to degree-level – and that’s great. For them, there should be progressive courses – when that person’s had some time trying the hobby, and wants to learn more.

What would I change?

I’ve been asked to outline what I’d do to change things. Well, it’s too late. Quietly in the background, the RSGB has consulted Ofcom, made the changes and printed the training books, before any of us trainers got to see the changes. It’s a fait accompli, so discussing how I’d do it differently, is academic at this stage. Nonetheless, as I was asked – here are my thoughts, for the little that they’re worth.

I’d keep Foundation. I’d keep it at roughly the same length, for the same cost, and at roughly the same complexity, but with a few updates (drop packet, add DV, etc), and a slight change on emphasis:

• More on operating and good practice (repeaters, nets, Q codes, talk groups, band plans, etc)
• More on setting up a station
• More on ‘radio’ (bands, propagation, SSB)
• Less transmitter box diagrams
• Less academic theory and resistor maths.

With the right weighting, this could be delivered in the same duration as current Foundation.

Foundation, to me, should be a taster into the hobby. Sure, it needs to include what Ofcom mandates for radio amateurs to be able to transmit in-band (and the existing licence conditions module does that perfectly well already). Safety’s an issue, so needs to be there too. Then enough material to get you on-air properly, and pointed in the right direction. As we all know, the real learning starts when you’ve got your licence.

As for the practicals? Here’s what I’d do:

• Keep the QSOs (odd that “tuning into a signal”, reading signal strength and using AF/RF gain, have all be dropped from 2019!). It should be pointed out that 1 QSO for HF and one for VHF/UHF is a minimum requirement (clubs should be encouraged to do more than the mandated minimum when it comes to getting on-air!)
• Keep Station Setup and Antenna Tuning (although at entry-level, more people are likely to have a VSWR meter, than an expensive antenna analyser)
• Don’t implement the LED and resistors practical. It’s nothing to do with radio, and wastes precious training time that could be used on operating or radio material)
• Morse – Apologies for offending any CWers reading, but I feel this should be optional, not mandatory. The criteria for Foundation should be “do you need to know this to get a licence and get started?”. The answer is “no”. I personally feel that the takeup for Morse would be higher if it was offered by training clubs shortly after a course, when candidates aren’t stressing about passing an exam, and will be more receptive to new modes.
• Data – On the assumption that newcomers tend, in general, to get involved with data modes, before they get into CW or construction, and that the learning curve for data is more shallow than CW/electronics, then this needs to be covered early on. Should it be mandatory? Some of the theory, yes (e.g. audio levels), but the practical would be far better if offered by training clubs shortly after a course (as with CW)
• Repeaters / Digital – If we’re saving time by dropping Morse and/or LEDs, that leaves time for a new operating practical. I’d opt for a “club’s choice” from “using a repeater”, “programming a handheld”, a very basic data mode, “using DMR/D-Star”, or something similar.

What’s next?

Between now (August 2018) and when the exams start, there will be a lot of activity. Some complaints from trainers and clubs concerned about delivery, and the creation of new books and training material. Some trainers will need to be ‘re-trained’, and some effort will be needed by clubs for the new practicals. What will the impact be? My best guess:

• Best Case: RSGB provides some excellent material for clubs. Trainers do what they do best and deliver content to students so they understand, and pass. New trainers are recruited to supplement any possible gaps (SDR, DV, etc). The hobby grows due, in part or full, due to having a relevant syllabus
• Worst case: Some trainers take the changes as an opportunity to give up. Some clubs struggle or stop training (cost / resources). The failure-rate increases as a result of the harder material. The drop in numbers continues or gets worse. Fall in revenue and members causes RSGB to phase in a new entry-level exam, for easy access to the hobby (perhaps limited to VHF/UHF only)

In reality, it’ll be somewhere in the middle, and it the impact will likely be discussed after the exam has bedded in for at least a year. Watch this space until the first year’s data is published in 2021.

There we go – my personal thoughts (which do not necessarily reflect the views of Essex Ham)

Pete M0PSX

Much of the prep for the course was completed some time ago, including the Course Proposal, Scheme of Work and Course Notes. I also supplement this is handouts, pages on one of my sites and some dummy training content. Over the last couple of days, I’ve been testing, re-writing and printing, to make sure everything is still current and correct.

The bag is packed, and I’m ready to go (guess the song title, anyone?)… Hopefully my students will be forgiving, given that they are my guinea pigs.

If I’n feeling brave, I may demo some live blogging on this page, which is of course, Powered By WordPress.

• Pete: 1
• Royal Mail: 0

For anyone interested, here’s a summary of the last six months of the battle:

January:

Discovered that my Royal Mail P.O Box service hasn’t been working for several months (thanks to Keith G6NHU for the help!). Asked for an apology, and a refund of just over £100 for the time that the service was not working

February:

After several phone calls and letters with Royal Mail Customer Services, I get nowhere. They admit the failure, but won’t deal with the complaint. After one shockingly bad letter, I decide to escalate to Royal Mail’s Postal Review Panel, who apparently take an ” unprejudiced and impartial view” of complaints

March:

A month goes by. No reply from the Postal Review Panel. When I chase for the second time, I’m told that someone called Christine is on holiday. I give up and go to POSTRS, the resolution service operated on behalf of PostComm, the regulator.

April:

Going to POSTRS wakes up Royal Mail. I get a £10 cheque to apologise for Christine being on holiday. Royal Mail provide a six page defense. Royal Mail tell me that my transcript of a phone call “cannot be used as evidence in the case”. So, I raise a Data Protection Request with Royal Mail’s DPA Team for the transcript and Customer Services records. Royal Mail provides 4 pages of call logs and case notes, which back up my claim, and give me an fascinating insight into what goes on behind the scenes.

May:

POSTRS release its final decision in a 12 page document. In summary:

• Royal Mail not disputing its negligence, or any of my evidence
• Royal Mail can provide no explanation for why it failed to provide service, despite an internal investigation
• Royal Mail “failed to address the complaint appropriately on a number of occasions”
• Royal Mail has caused me unnecessary “stress, anxiety and inconvenience” though its handling of my complaint

Result: Royal Mail ordered to pay £20 compensation for poor complaint handling, and to issue a written apology. They are powerless to help with a refund or compensation as the P.O Box is “out of scope”. Next step, according to POSTRS is to go to court.

I write to the Chief Executive, Moya Greene’s Office, to see if I can avoid court action. Her office doesn’t reply. Postal Review Panel replies saying that if I want to take them to court, here’s the address to serve papers to. Shocked by the arrogance, I consider taking them to court.

June:

Royal Mail sends me a one line apology that they’ve been ordered to, but forget to enclose the cheque. I remind them of their obligations

Royal Mail writes again, this time with the cheque, apologising for forgetting, and telling me that “coaching and training will be given”

Enough’s enough. I issue a Small Claims Court claim against Royal Mail on the 7th of June (cost £35)

A lawyer at Royal Mail Legal Services writes to me. Can we settle out of court for £150? As this doesn’t cover court costs, I say no, and ask for costs. Several emails exchanged with Royal Mail’s lawyer, who happens to be the most rational and pragmatic of all the people I’ve dealt with at Royal Mail.

July:

Cheque arrives for £192 from the laywer. Added to the £30 for poor complaints handling, that’s £222. I cancel the court proceedings.

Summary
I can’t help feeling that it would have been easier to refund my £110 back in January when Royal Mail admitted it had messed up. Mistakes happen, and an early refund would have ended the matter. Instead, Royal Mail dragged the matter on and on, making more mistakes along the way.

For me, this became a matter of principle. I now have my refund, plus payment to cover costs. No real compensation for my time in battling against them, but I consider this to be a win.

Added to the £222 they have paid up, I dread to think how much time this has cost Royal Mail’s Customer Services Team, Information Rights Team, Postal Review Panel, and finally, their legal team over the last six months. All for a £110 refund.

Final Note!!

Interesting piece in today’s Telegraph: Royal Mail complaints rise by a third – Seems I’m one of the 120,884 complaints in the first 3 months of the year. I hope the other 120,883 of you have the energy to persevere too!

No, today isn’t National Tea Dunking Day, in fact it’s Towel Day, a day set up by fans of the Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy to make the passing of Douglas Adams in 2001.

What is Towel Day?

It’s a day that all fans carry a towel, in acknowledgment that a towel is the most staggeringly useful thing that anyone can carry. I’m sitting here typing, sitting on my towel as a mark of respect, and I’m hoping that many of my like-minded chums out there, even if they’re not carrying a towel, are at least thinking towel-ly thoughts with the occasional Hitchhikers quote drifting through their minds.

Towel Day has prompted me to revisit the original radio series of HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy, even though a) I should be working, b) I should be revising, and c) I know the script off by heart, but it will be getting a listen at some point today. If you’re unfamiliar with the whole Hitchhikers thing – forget the movie, and enjoy the radio series, which you can download for little more than three Earth pounds – H2H2 at Audible.

Even the cat is getting into the spirit, having a nap on a handy towel.

Share and Enjoy Towel Day, and check out the various Towel Day activities around the world at towelday.org

It’s on day’s like this, I really wish I’d listened to what my mum said…

(By the way, you can buy the T-Shirt from ThinkGeeks.)

If, like me, you spend a serious amount of time online, then I’d encourage you to take a look (I’ve embedded the link below).

It’s a short speech given by a chap called Eli Pariser, at a TED (changing ideas) conference in the US in February.

For those reading that can’t spare the 9 minutes to watch, at the root of this, is that the Internet is being filtered and censored – not by Governments, but by the likes of Facebook and Google, and their filters. We’re increasingly living in a bubble, as new technology filters out the “stuff” that it thinks we’re not interested in.

Now, I like filters. I don’t want junk mail, and I don’t want irrelevant clutter thrown at me when I’m searching, but as online personalisation increases, am I in danger of being locked in a tiny bubble.

Thought provoking stuff, and a good explanation of the bubble effect.

I’d encourage you to watch this clip. It could change your attitude to online search…

Interestingly, when I was doing some more reading on the subject, I stumbled upon a piece on the Huffington Post commenting on this clip. Right in the middle of the piece, is a huge ad for “Protect My Bubble”, the gadget insurers. The advertising filter has detected “bubble” as a keyword, and is serving ads accordingly.

Filters – good or bad? I’m hoping I don’t come across as blinkered here, but I like my noise filtered if it gets my work done quicker. I would, however, welcome a filter “off switch”, so I can see outside by bubble from time to time. This might be a topic I cover in an upcoming podcast, so any opinions on this are welcomed.

More on this subject here: TED: Online Bubble

Broadcasting to you live from the top of the Harwich High Lighthouse.

I’m here with my Amateur Radio buddy Jim 2E0RMI, at the top of this disused lighthouse. Jim’s set up a 2 metre rig with a pole sticking up out of the lighthouse, and he’s making some good contacts using the 2 metre band plus the Internet Amateur Radio service.

It’s a windy old day up here, with some great views.

For information on the lighthouse, go to harwich.net/natwire.htm Good fun playing with radios and admiring the view, although it’s 100 steps down to the nearest loo, and there’s no coffee for miles.

Data provided by residents of the UK goes to help shape the country’s future. It happens every 10 years, and each year, we get more and more questions. This year, the Government want to know what type of central heating system we have, how each of us get to work and what exams we’ve passed. The controversial, and optional, question, is religion.

In general, I’m in favour of the census, and believe it should be treated seriously – mainly for the family history element. For some years now, our family has been researching our family tree, and access to the 1841, 1851, 1861, 1871, 1881, 1891, 1901 and 1911 census has been invaluable in tracing ancestors and building up a picture of our extended family (I use the excellent Ancestry.co.uk for census access). In the hope that the 2011 census falls into the hands of my descendants, I’ve completed the form by hand (as opposed to the online submission that many would suspect I’d do), and I’ve been happy to tell the ONS that my central heating is gas-fired, to help keep future generations informed.

I’ve also, of course, told them that I’m a Jedi – 400,000 people in the UK declared themselves as Jedi in 2001, making Jedi the 4th largest religion. See: Jedi Census Phenomenon at Wikipedia

The phrase “May the force be with you” is especially true today, as I’m using a Star Wars Lego game as part of a review I’m writing re. the Nintendo 3DS.

Those who know me well, know that one of my pet hates is poor customer service. I admit it – it drives me nuts. It also drives me to make a complaint, and to keep complaining until I get a result.

Since January, I’ve been in dispute with Royal Mail, and a letter from them today has me bouncing off the walls. I’m venting my frustration on those poor souls who read my occasional blog posts, mainly because the cat just doesn’t understand the formal complaints process.

In a nutshell, after moving house a year or so back, I told the Royal Mail that I’d moved, and to redirect my business post to the new address. They wrote to confirm the change, and all should have been well.

It transpires that all was not as well as expected, and for months, my mail’s been bounced as “gone away”. I paid a visit to the local delivery office, to be told that Head Office hadn’t notified them of the change, and they’d fix it. A call to Head Office in Plymouth confirmed that a mistake had indeed been made, and they’d get back to me.

In due course, a letter arrived confirming that the delivery office didn’t know about the change of address until I went in. This is true… but unhelpful, as I knew that.

So, another phone call. “Oh dear”, she said, before agreeing that the letter was inappropriate. “Leave it with me”. Nothing.

With phone calls getting me nowhere, I wrote a letter (after all, perhaps Royal Mail like getting letters, and the revenue from my stamp). It was the reply to this letter that got to me today.

Again, I’m told that the Delivery Office weren’t told until January this year, despite Royal Mail’s letter in March 2010 confirming the new details. Then:

“Having reviewed the details of your claim, my manager and I feel that our colleague dealt appropriately with your complaint. Therefore I cannot change the original decision or take any further action”.

So, a business mail service paid for in March 2010 has never materialised, I’ve lost lots of mail, Royal Mail’s admitted the error, but they won’t do anything about it and have closed the matter.

This is gonna be fun.

I’m already at phone call number 4, letter number 3, email number 1 and Stage 3 in the official complaints procedure. Apparently, the next step is the Postal Review Panel, then the Postal Redress Service.

Wish me luck!

Today’s oddness appeared just after lunch… an email from an Internet advertising company I’ve been working with for five or six years, to the email address they’ve been using for years, asking me the following:

“We are currently undergoing our standard site checks at , and would like to make sure the below domain belongs to you.”

… and giving me 7 days to confirm.

Despite the fact I’ve been working with them for many years, and they mail me about that domain about once a week, what’s odd is that they did what they did…

An email to me@domainname.com asking if I own domainname.com

I’m struggling to work that one out…

I’m creating this post as I need to test that one of the WordPress plug-ins I’m using is working. What should happen, is that this blog entry, created on the petesipple.co.uk domain, should auto-post to Twitter (once), and also add a posting to my Facebook wall. Rather than typing “just testing”, I thought I’d add a few words to report on the day.

• An early start with tea and toast
• My podcasting buddy’s been here, recording some audio about streaming media. Lots of editing to do, I fear
• Into town for lunch, a visit to the bank, then coffee and biccies at Costa Coffee (coming soon to Leigh).
• Back to base to firefight a dozen emails and feed the cat (apparently urgent)
• Just about to phone a couple of college students about an upcoming course
• Trying to fix a problem with WordPress, with help from a plug-in developer, and the lads at Namesco support

So there. That’s my day so far – now off to see if this post makes it to Facebook…