18th Amdt 2 exam.

I am really out of kilter with exam methodology.

To my simple mind I imagine that to show an understanding of the regs to a 70% pass rate then each one of us should be able to answer to pass rate without referring to the book . We really should have enough knowledge before attempting the Regs questions exam.

However, in the Inspect and test exam I believe it is reasonable to imagine that in real life the candidate might actually have relevant text books on site in a real situation or at least back at the office when doing relevant paperwork.

As I said, I`m out on my own in these thoughts I think.

I am really out of kilter with exam methodology.

To my simple mind I imagine that to show an understanding of the regs to a 70% pass rate then each one of us should be able to answer to pass rate without referring to the book . We really should have enough knowledge before attempting the Regs questions exam.

However, in the Inspect and test exam I believe it is reasonable to imagine that in real life the candidate might actually have relevant text books on site in a real situation or at least back at the office when doing relevant paperwork.

As I said, I`m out on my own in these thoughts I think.

That would be knowledge of the regs, rather than understanding.  I'm not sure that I can tell you the clause numbers but I know broadly which topics are in which chapter. I suspect many of us are the same.
But there should be a jolly good feel for what looks sensible or what needs checking in the detail and that ought not to need to the big book. It is not the easiest thing to carry up a stepladder after all.

I'm inclined to agree that if I was setting it there would be some simpler questions 'blind' to check absolute knowledge, perhaps about  gross current handing and voltage drops just to weed out the dangerously clueless,  and then some more obsure questions with the book to test navigation and correct use of the index. (adiabatics discrimination diversity etc.)

More generally I'm not too surprised - but this is fine for what I would consider to be skilled fitter, mostly recipe following,  rather than designer of novel things from 1st principles, and it may be that the level of detail is not that critical . One can always 'phone a friend' if there are only a few hard cases, you just have to know when to do that.

(Mind you, to cross refer another thread, I would wonder how well those chaps  would do trying to EICR some of the stuff I have specced over the years. )

Mike.

ebee said:

To my simple mind I imagine that to show an understanding of the regs to a 70% pass rate then each one of us should be able to answer to pass rate without referring to the book . We really should have enough knowledge before attempting the Regs questions exam.

However, in the Inspect and test exam I believe it is reasonable to imagine that in real life the candidate might actually have relevant text books on site in a real situation or at least back at the office when doing relevant paperwork.

I would say the other way around.

If I am designing an installation, I can take as long as I want to look up e.g. CCC of 6 mm² T&E. 

Granted you may need to check your test results against the BBB, but I&T is more I than T and my experience of the practical exam was that there wasn't time to look anything up. And if you didn't demonstrate safe isolation at the beginning, or indeed safe working during, you didn't get that nice certificate with the hologram.