Information presented at the Fall 2022 MERPAC meeting confirms that a chart plot question is only linked to one following question in the new exams. Progressive linking is a talking point that attempts to deflect from inadequate exam preparation. Based on this revised linking of questions, there is less linking in the new chart plots than there was in the old plots.
1 Like
Donāt kid yourself. The quality is dropping. One reason so many students fail license exams is because many are not failed out of course curriculumāmommy/daddy make a phone call to the school when genius kid getās a FAILā¦
Another reason is instructors are often garbage. Low quality pay = low quality instructors. Toss in ridiculously stupid administration that has no clue what sailing is about, and you get the current mess of the education system.
Possibly, and very likely, considering those that make up the organization. But it shows the test writers ignorance/incompetence/plain stupidity to use non-specific jargon when a simple precise ā12.5kts Speed Through Waterā works better, as you stated. The purpose is to test the competence of a specific skill, but idiot bureaucrats get excited over being the smartest in the room.
1 Like
There are maybe around 500 3M AGT graduates a year? And you have worked with how many of those? Your personal observation isnāt enough to make statements like, āthey arenāt as good as when I went through.ā Now, if youāre are going site a peer reviewed paper, or even better, do the research yourself, Iām more inclined to give you some credibility. The fact is, this is an old story echoed across many different industries. āThis younger generation is all outta sorts. When I was their ageā¦ā blah, blah, blah. And yet, the maritime industry continues to get safer with each generation (for a multitude of reasons).
Covid is the only clear reason why a drop in proficiency could be seen over the last couple years. But those same parents you say make a phone call, existed when you went through too, teachers have never been adequately compensated, and there are just as many good and bad students that exist today as they did 30 years ago.
1 Like
Awesome, a bureaucrat amongst us!
Not here to prove anything to you. The quality of education, and competence of entry level has degraded in all industries. This is obviously my opinion, as formed by being involved in all areas of the process. Iām not whining about it, as it is what it is.
Education has been taken over by bureaucrats and administrators. Instead of ensuring students get a strong baseline understanding of the fundamentals, most educators hand 1000 page books and say read/memorize. And lets not forget the abuse of death-by-powerpointā¦
I donāt drive ships, but itās not that hard to draw some lines on a map and do some calcs to solve a problem. The reason so many failed could partly be to a bad test. But Iād also say that many students donāt have the skill.
So what do you think the solution is?
At least thereās some practical test to have to pass. Not like those engineering tests that are straight multiple choice and you only need a 70 on each one to passā¦
Iām not asking you to prove it to me, as I just assume people making such statements would be able to have some proof at all. My point is you are making statements on your own observations, and likely flawed observations/bias at that, which was my original point to the previous poster.
This isnāt a pissing contest of whose generation is better, is about gathering actual information and making informed decisions to improve.
Every generation wants shun the next, yet the world keeps getting better somehow. Globally speaking, less people live in poverty, we have more free time than ever before, itās the most peaceful time in human history (we kill each other less), more people have access to healthcare, people are living longer, people have greater access to education, we are kinder than ever beforeā¦and the list goes on. By nearly every metric you can think of to measure quality of life, humans have gotten better globally throughout history. Thereās good WSJ and Forbes articles on this, plus a great TedTalk if thatās your thing.
With regard to the chart plot, the last exam was unnecessary in the manner it went about finding a cadetās knowledge of T-Nav, and there are a lot of good points on this tread that explain why, so I wonāt.
If you think the industry is going to hell in a hand basket, I wonāt try any harder than this post to change your mind. Take care.
3 Likes
There is no problem with the chart plot exam, itās the test taker. The correct way to pass the chart plot is to continue practicing, not memorizing the question bank. If someone canāt pass the exam they simply havenāt practiced enough. In the real world, mistakes are compounded and this exam reflects that reality. What we donāt need is excuses and a watered down test. Itās not about tradition or obsolescence, itās about mastering the required skills in order to be a competent member of a bridge team. If you canāt do that, you donāt deserve a license. Same now as it was then and before that, whenever that may have been.
2 Likes
Have you taken the exam?
As far as the real world having compound errors, Iād argue that there are a lot more clues in real life that will tell you that you screwed up the previous plot when you go to lay down the next one. Tests do not give you those clues. So as mentioned previously in this thread, one mistake (and we all make mistakes at some point) may punish you unnecessarily.
Iām a former Special Operations Navigator with the USAF, so chart plots are nothing new to me. During qualifiers, our instructor made an exam as close to the chart plot in question and while taking it, I wanted to throw my triangle at him like a Ninja star. I get 100% on nearly every chart plot in Lapware (the 1st time!), but this exam was over the top.
So whatās the point?
In our industry specifically, has it ever been good? The more I stay out here and sail the more I realize weāre all just making it up as we go, and maybe we are lucky enough to have someone that took the initiative to go above and beyond, and here you find the occasional ECDIS wizard, or someone with a wide background in cargo, or someone with actual leadership training. On average a mariner is not all of these things. And while the teachers at the academies are doing their best, its been my experience that they either barely sailed, or stopped sailing 20 years ago. Its an incredibly niche industry, and finding people who are qualified to teach across 6 schools has got to be part of the problem.
Prime example. Last night someone put out an HF DSC call with a follow up voice frequency at a time of night that covered much of the GOM. This makes the HF radio ring like a phone. When I tune to the frequency, its just a bunch of people saying āuh, hello?ā To eachother. I heard 20 american voices and none of them understood how to use GMDSS, and honestly it sounded like they have never used a radio, and frankly Iāve met maybe one mariner who was vaugly aware of how the HF radio works.
What im getting at, is even with (or especially with) the old timers who supposedly got a better education, there is still a ton of winging it going on. And I would say this extends to our regulating agencies as well, like the USCG. Maybe its me growing up, and the more I see the less I know, but when you realize how small the industry is, and John Konrad is just some guy with a blog, the folks in the coast guard arent in some mystical ivory tower, my captain is just trying to get a pay check the way hes been doing it for 20 years, and the port captain is a 2nd mate just like me, its starting to look like the emperor has no clothes. There is no plan.
And at the end of the day, we still make it to the sea bouy, so that counts for something, but I think in the age of information we just become selfaware of our shortcomings.
4 Likes
I dont think plotting mistakes compound in the real world like they do in a chart plot. If youre on a tug boat and you calculate your speed of advance to be 50 knots, you arent going to apply 50 knots SOG to your DR if you decided you were going to manually calculate your set and drift for some reason. 2NM XTE is totaly acceptable in a lot of cases, but will give you wildly wrong answers on the exam. If you tell someone your ETA is 1300 and you arrive at 1306 or 1254, frankly no one notices.
On the scale of chart that the test is on, the level of precision on the test does not reflect reality, especially with the tools you supposedly have. I never sailed inna Pre-GPS world, but there is no way you were as accurate as the coast guard exam required.
2 Likes
Yes, and I passed, because I studied how to plot.
So you are a brand new 3M?
No, Iām not, but I took a similar chart plot exam when I tested. The example that is shown on the NMC website is no different than any that I or anyone else took. Are you a new 3M, or you still waiting to take license? Weāve all taken it, it sucks, but itās part of the deal. The difference with the instruction during COVID may have played a part, but itās still up to you to pass.
I will be sitting for my exams in August. To be clear, I donāt think anyone is arguing that you shouldnāt have to study. The argument was about this specific exam which has clearly created enough concern amongst the Academy instructors. It isnāt those who have failed that are complaining, or their parents.
I feel like I only recently took the exam, and honestly chart plot is the easiest if you actually know the material. Those people taking the exam now were probably freshmen when they wouldāve taken Terrestrial Navigation class, and I think COVID probably had a huge impact on instruction.
Did you test before the new question bank came out? Because if you did then you, like myself, quite literally knew the material. Meaning there was only a handful of possible plots, all available on Lapware, and if you studied as instructed then you were very familiar with all the plots and probably knew the right answers without even plotting.
You may have taken it in the last couple years, but those were the same exams for a decade or so. It is only this last yearās exam that the instructors are questioning. Only one group of cadets have taken it thus far. So if that wasnāt you, then itās a moot point. Not you, but a lot of people have been saying, āI took it, and I passed. Suck it up, newbies.ā And thatās not the point of this at all. Itās one very specific exam in question that maybe 150-200 people took around last August.
Yeah you go ahead and use your map to find out where we areā¦ā¦ Iāll stick to using nautical charts!
Maps= land
Charts= ocean
I do have to agree with you that recent cadets that have been pumped out of academies are not that great. Especially ones that have never cadet shipped (suny) or have only cadet shipped (usmma). I find that those cadets are less prepared than others when they first come out. Compared to those at Mass, Maine, or Texas. Thatās my opinion and experience over the last couple of years.
That may be so, however the issues I originally raised, that the consortium complained that 1) The USCG has increased its focus on the chart plot, and that 2) the questions are linked, are both in error. The focus on the exam is at the same level as itās always been. Previous exams had linked questions.
1 Like