<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Code Proficiency Programs: Do We Really Want/Need Them?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/</link>
	<description>My personal adventures in amateur radio</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:21:25 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dave N4KZ</title>
		<link>http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/#comment-58872</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave N4KZ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:03:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/#comment-58872</guid>
		<description>Volunteer CW receiving tests? I prefer the idea of promoting actual on-air CW operating. In fact, the day after the big FCC announcement about Morse testing going away, I e-mailed a proposal to my ARRL director for something I call the COPY Award. COPY is an acronymn for CW On-Air Proficiency Yardstick.

It would have multiple steps with endorsements available. To quality, CW ops could exchange paper QSLs or use LoTW. Recipients would get an award after 25 or 50 on-air CW contacts and subsequent endorsements as the number of CW on-air contacts increased.

Would this be a hugely popular award? Probably not but it might appeal to a certain type of new ham -- one who really enjoys a challenge and wants to "brag" about his Morse proficiency. But let's make it about actually getting on the air using this mode and not just testing in a sterile environment.

73, Dave, N4KZ
Frankfort, KY</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Volunteer CW receiving tests? I prefer the idea of promoting actual on-air CW operating. In fact, the day after the big FCC announcement about Morse testing going away, I e-mailed a proposal to my ARRL director for something I call the COPY Award. COPY is an acronymn for CW On-Air Proficiency Yardstick.</p>
<p>It would have multiple steps with endorsements available. To quality, CW ops could exchange paper QSLs or use LoTW. Recipients would get an award after 25 or 50 on-air CW contacts and subsequent endorsements as the number of CW on-air contacts increased.</p>
<p>Would this be a hugely popular award? Probably not but it might appeal to a certain type of new ham &#8212; one who really enjoys a challenge and wants to &#8220;brag&#8221; about his Morse proficiency. But let&#8217;s make it about actually getting on the air using this mode and not just testing in a sterile environment.</p>
<p>73, Dave, N4KZ<br />
Frankfort, KY</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ned</title>
		<link>http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/#comment-58549</link>
		<dc:creator>Ned</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2007 22:33:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/#comment-58549</guid>
		<description>I agree with you Dan.  If CW were such a viable mode these days, I'm sure most countries, icluding ours, would have retained it as a licensing requirement.  


I think VE's have enough to do without adding more burdens. Let those CW organizations and ARRL handle this.  They have been doing so for years and are much more efficient at it I'm sure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you Dan.  If CW were such a viable mode these days, I&#8217;m sure most countries, icluding ours, would have retained it as a licensing requirement.  </p>
<p>I think VE&#8217;s have enough to do without adding more burdens. Let those CW organizations and ARRL handle this.  They have been doing so for years and are much more efficient at it I&#8217;m sure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/#comment-58539</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2007 21:15:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/#comment-58539</guid>
		<description>If proficiency awards are important then why don’t we test proficiency for designated tasks? How about proficiency testing for receiving and sending traffic messages or something useful where we are evaluating the operator’s ability to complete the full tak.

73’s Richard K5ANR</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If proficiency awards are important then why don’t we test proficiency for designated tasks? How about proficiency testing for receiving and sending traffic messages or something useful where we are evaluating the operator’s ability to complete the full tak.</p>
<p>73’s Richard K5ANR</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: larry</title>
		<link>http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/#comment-57729</link>
		<dc:creator>larry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jan 2007 16:23:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/#comment-57729</guid>
		<description>keep the proficiency program in place at least give the new wannabe's something to look forward to..the elimination of cw tests sucked</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>keep the proficiency program in place at least give the new wannabe&#8217;s something to look forward to..the elimination of cw tests sucked</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: B. Scott Andersen</title>
		<link>http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/#comment-57712</link>
		<dc:creator>B. Scott Andersen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jan 2007 13:37:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kb6nu.com/code-proficiency-programs-do-we-really-wantneed-them/#comment-57712</guid>
		<description>I am something of a fan of these programs. I view the skills associated with sending and receiving Morse to be very much like reading music and playing a musical instrument. Music students use a variety of means to gain proficiency in music and with their instruments. The practice alone, work with instructors, practice and play duets, go to contests where they play solo or within small groups, and compete for trophies, metals, and certificates of accomplishment. Not every effort is aimed solely at playing in a concert with a big group and big audience, just as every effort for those learning Morse need not be on the air in a pile-up. I say embrace all the ways that students of the modes can practice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am something of a fan of these programs. I view the skills associated with sending and receiving Morse to be very much like reading music and playing a musical instrument. Music students use a variety of means to gain proficiency in music and with their instruments. The practice alone, work with instructors, practice and play duets, go to contests where they play solo or within small groups, and compete for trophies, metals, and certificates of accomplishment. Not every effort is aimed solely at playing in a concert with a big group and big audience, just as every effort for those learning Morse need not be on the air in a pile-up. I say embrace all the ways that students of the modes can practice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
