Has anyone else noticed that the people writing the learning/assessment objectives and the people writing the training material don’t actually appear to have worked together?
For example, one of the merit objectives on Radio Comms is “Explain the relationship between frequency and aerial length”.
Nowhere in any of the training material is the relationship between the two actually mentioned.
I feel this is the same for most of the ulitlearn subjects and assessments, certainly at senior and master level…
Comments in the ‘letter’ from TG1 ref Ultilearn, should this be a surprise?
What it makes cystal clear is that quality control or even basic ‘sanity checking’ has not been implimented or insisted upon by either the CTO or TG1. You do get the impression that it’s been regarded as hand rubbing job done off for tea and medals, when in fact it’s far from it.
[quote=“MattB” post=4751]For example, one of the merit objectives on Radio Comms is “Explain the relationship between frequency and aerial length”.
Nowhere in any of the training material is the relationship between the two actually mentioned.[/quote]
Disapointingly unsurprising; but interesting… I didn’t actually look at the training material for comms. I just went through the learning outcomes and wrote my own around them. Including what I need my first class cadets to know re basic comms.
But you’ve picked a good example for me. The actual relationship is pretty advanced for “basic” comms (and is in fact part of the LO for Advanced Radio & Radar).
I just taught mine that “in general, higher frequency = shorter wavelength = shorter antenna. Lower frequency = longer wavelength = longer antenna”.
I assume that’s all they’re looking for…
I simply didn’t feel that a basic comms lesson was the right time to start teaching them about wave function, velocity factor, or getting them to calculate dipole antenna lengths for a given frequency. Nor the time to point out that ‘apparent’ antenna length will also be different between dipole, helical, coaxial array, &c at the same frequency.
Learning outcomes are fine…provided they’re not so damn vague.
^^^^ Seconded, i could have written those same words…
i will confess i havent pulled up/out the “new” training material for the comms section, instead using ACP31 Vol 6 as my “instructors notes” to cover the LO taking advantage of the diagrams, alphabet and prowords list as a easy to share medium to pass around the room
I have to say that the new textbook is actually pretty good, and is one of the better Ultilearn resources.
having not seen it i can’t argue with you, but looking at the LO and what the old system covered, it seem simple enough to teach the same lesson, putting more or less importance on certain aspects as per the LO
Here’s another one:
Initial Expedition Training LO - “explain the importance of factors for consideration when planning a walking expedition”.
WTF?
In English?