"Subject Matter Expert" required - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / projects

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:04:28 am
content: I am currently on a BTEC L3 electronics course. The course is an utter farce as it is full of errors and inaccuracies and anything that is not inaccurate is so wooly it is pointless. I am currently in dispute with the course provider about how bad it is but they maintain that they have a "subject matter expert" who has reviewed my comments and can't see the problem (naturally because they don't want to admit to 15 other students that they need to shut the thing down and give everyone a refund). Obviously I'm not qualified so trying to argue is hard as as far as they are concerned or at least officially they will say that I'm not in a position to knock the material if I'm not qualified.Is there anyone here that has more than a BTEC L3 willing to be my subject matter expert and counter these clowns ? I am angry that this is the only distance learning course available and it is basically a scam. Yet another example of what happened when you privatize a vital service in the UK, the company ICS Learn is a private company and they are backed approved by edexcel / pearson another private company.So anyone want to take on the world with me ?

author: KJDS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:10:51 am
content: You need to find someone that is experienced in teaching BTEC and probably someone that is involved in arranging the syllabus. A call to the IET may help, however if you paid for the course with a credit card then I'd use their legal team to help with a refund.

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:14:32 am
content: What, specifically, do you need someone to do?Are you looking for someone who will read excerpts from your course material and say "that's right", or "that's wrong", or "I can see how that might be misunderstood", or whatever?Or are you in need of someone who will write something along the lines of "Dear sirs, I have a degree in Wormhole Physics from the University of Utopia, and it's been brought to my attention that you're teaching these kids a load of old...."?I'm sure if you were to post a few specific examples of what you're citing as inaccurate, then the forum collective will happy back it up or shoot it down in flames as applicable... but presumably you want someone with more credibility than just "someone off the internet"? (Even if that "someone" is a degree qualified professional engineer with years of experience).

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:15:03 am
content: Yes it was paid for on a company credit card by my employer but how do you argue for a refund ? the credit card company need to be satisfied that the course is pants and it's back to the same old problem of having it independently verified or at least I need someone on my side to call a "subject matter expert". I will be replying to their stupid letter to ask who their "subject matter expert" is and what their qualifications and experience are because "subject matter expert" means absolutely nothing.i will be contacting the CAB tomorrow who now stand in for trading standards that the government conveniently watered down and took away from public access.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:17:20 am
content: Quote from: AndyC_772 on July 03, 2014, 07:14:32 amYea something like that, except they are not kids they are adults who are putting their hands in their own pockets to pay for this crap or their employers.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:19:31 am
content: I am currently uploading a video to youtube that constitutes part of my assignment as instead of demonstrate how the circuit works, I demonstrate that it can't work and i explain what went wrong, I'll link it once it's up.Unfortunately I am bound by a copyright agreement on the actual course material so I won't be able to make the whole cabuble public as I'm sure they'd be down my throats, not falling for that one.....

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:22:33 am
content: The mentioned the magic word, "privatise"I presume you'd need someone from the UK, possibly with membership of whatever professional engineering body you have over their? to give this thing more weight.Actually, might be worth asking said engineering body, especially if passing this course might potentially credit you toward some sort of associate membership or something?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:25:01 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 03, 2014, 07:15:03 amYes, that's tricky.Here in oz all goods and services sold must of be "merchandisable quality" and "fit for purpose" etc. Consumer law gives basic protections like that on everything regardless of other laws or contracts. UK might have something similar?But again it does come down to proving it.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:25:23 am
content: Hi Dave not neccessarily, the course is available to a world wide audience (I've been doing italian language support to a student in italy) so they can't sneeze at someone with equivalent qualifications outside of the UK particularly with a proven track record

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:27:30 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 03, 2014, 07:25:01 amCorrect, we have the supply of good and services act 1982 but by services they are more interested in goods related services or things like fixing my car, it was an updating of a previous act that covered goods only. And yes before i can argue poor service i need to prove it and my word means nothing although I'm making life as difficult as possible for them

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:37:30 am
content: Your word doesn't mean 'nothing' if you're right. Objective, demonstrably right.That's the nice thing about science, it's rarely open to opinion.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 07:42:14 am
content: Quote from: AndyC_772 on July 03, 2014, 07:37:30 amI've already tried to point that out but it fell on deaf ears, I sent almost 3 pages of errors and comments on one module and all i got back was that they would correct a couple of typo's but my tutor would contact me to go over the other problems and explain them to me ie I don't know what I'm talking about.

author: bwat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 08:05:14 am
content: Any concrete examples of things you and they disagree on? If you write things in your own words you're not breaching copyright. Even then if you look at section 8 ofhttp://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p01_uk_copyright_law, this definitely falls under criticism. See alsohttp://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p09_fair_use, but don't go risking anything because a computer programmer gave you legal advice!

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 08:07:23 am
content: I'm about 5 minutes away from publishing a youtube video that is part of my assignment, rather than show it works i show why it does not.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 08:14:11 am
content: Hopefully it's load enoughhttp://youtu.be/fLq7-GzbGG0

author: Codemonkey
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 08:47:45 am
content: I suspect your circuit should have used a JFET.Did your schematic look something like this ?http://www.simplecircuitdiagram.com/2010/12/05/basic-fet-amplifier/

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 08:54:54 am
content: No the source resistor is missing and when they did explain the JFET they put the source resistor in, as mentioned they didn't explain how to choose values in the course so asking choose them in the assignment is pointless. The symbol is also that of a mosfet so like i said they have supplied a diagram of an AC coupled NOT gate.

author: bwat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 09:02:17 am
content: http://www.ece.ucsb.edu/Faculty/rodwell/Classes/ece2c/labs/Lab_2_2C_2007.pdfpage 8, no source resistor.I can't view your video as I only have html5 video so I'm answering blind. Ignore me if I'm lost and making things worse!

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 09:18:14 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 03, 2014, 07:19:31 amAs soon as I started reading the thread, I *knew* that was going to be the case.Nice scam they have going, if the material really is junk yet no one but paying students are allowed to look at it. Also, any student who makes noise about it is guaranteed to fail - you do realize that, right? So since you already complained, you might as well go all out trying to get a refund.What's the bet they spent more money on lawyers than competent educators to build the course material?Better make local backup copies of all the course material you can access now. While you can. You might need them for um.. legal reference purposes.It would be such a shame if somehow it happened to get onto an anonymous file share server.Ah... *can* you make local copies? Or did they rig it so you can't?Bear in mind that there are probably individualized ID markers in your copies of the material. If these guys have any competence at all - which they may not.Typical doc-ID methods (just for printed docs, not delving into data buried in files, and steganography are:- Modulated microspacing variations between characters.- Deliberate misspellings and punctuation variations in the text.- The proverbial 'tiny yellow dots' - much discussed on the net.It would be an interesting legal issue, whether their failure to provide 'fit for purpose' material voids whatever contract you undertook with them - including the non-disclosure clause. (I don't think it's a copyright agreement - there's no such thing. Material is just generally copyright, or not.)Anyway, good luck.

author: bwat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 09:27:02 am
content: Quote from: TerraHertz on July 03, 2014, 09:18:14 amHe might mean something like this:QuoteI use something similar in my software licensing.

author: Legit-Design
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 09:29:35 am
content: Provide link to some image site that you found just happens to host some of the offending images? If you are worried about something embedded in text or images just find something that was taken with a camera that doesn't have too good resolution, but enough resolution so things can be clearly seen.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 09:32:51 am
content: Well i have the material in hand, if they want it back I'll be making a copy. I am not the only person complaining but i am the only one with enough knowledge and experience to say the course is rubbish.attached is their own forum thread on a pdf, i don't think they have been clever enough to put copy protection on, it's just a standard agreement.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 09:40:53 am
content: So, randomly drawing a circuit having just read your description, is it this:Not this:And they gave you no component values and no part number for the FET (or whatever they intended)?The idea that they can claim copyright or non-disclosure on such a circuit is outrageous.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 09:46:54 am
content: yea that is about the diagram and they are both the same ? I'm not fussed about the diagram just have not scanned it in yet, you have to read the whole module and assignment to understand how abysmal it is.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 09:59:16 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 03, 2014, 09:46:54 amNo, they're not the same. One critical difference.The second one could work, because it shows a bias voltage source on the gate. If that puts the MOSFET into its linear region, a small signal input via the cap will result in an amplified signal on the output.The 'battery' symbol is often used in generic circuits to indicate 'some fixed voltage'. Not necessarily an actual 1.5V or whatever battery.So it's important to know, which is like the circuit you've been given?Edit: My battery symbol is crap due to sketching it quickly. But in a way that's good, because it's important to be alert to the difference from the various cap symbols. Caps must always have the two lines the same length, even if one may be curved or hollow, or thick. Battery symbol always has one shorter than the other. The short one is the negative end.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 10:01:56 am
content: yes of course, no no DC biasing at all like I said in the video

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 10:05:46 am
content: They were supposed to supply the parts, but i got no FET and it was not on their parts list

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 10:57:05 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 03, 2014, 10:01:56 amSorry, I'd only watched a few minutes by then. Now reached the end. Yeah, those final waveforms are what I'd expect too.So wait, did they supply any parts at all? And they _are_ supposed to? From your video it sounds like you were supplying all the parts from your own stock, not just the FET.Personally, if they are supposed to supply the parts but failed, I'd have just stopped there and demanded they did their job. If they're being paid for that stuff, why bridge *any* of their flaws yourself? Let alone such a show stopper for most students.It's really a pity you feel you can't post their actual shonky diagram, text, parts list missing the FET, and so on. It seems like it's really bad, but it would be nice to see the warty beast directly.Incidentally, what does the course cost? Or is that under the non-disclosure too?Edit: PS. I wonder if this dysfunctional course might be deliberate? Some sort of creepage of the US 'Common Core' educational sabotage into the UK? Google 'us common core insane', and you'll find out what I mean. 'Inexplicably unworkable methods' is a prominent factor in Common Core too. So extreme that it's hard to conceive how it could be the result of anything but deliberate intent to sabotage the education system.Leaving out the FET from a parts list of five parts, 2 x R, 2 x C, 1 FET... seriously, that cannot be a real mistake. No way.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 11:02:49 am
content: The course was £522 with a 20% discount so usually more, a further £107 had to be paid to edxcel to get the certificate issued.I used all of my own parts yes, so much easier. They supposedly supplied all parts but the mosfet was missing from the list and the parts, the parts were sent direct from Farnell so I got single resistors in big plastic bags.I know in theory I should not have bothered even attempting it but I wanted to try my shiny new camera out and show them what a bunch of berks they are. I have also linked the youtube video to their forum telling other students that this is the sort of response warranted.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 11:35:49 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 03, 2014, 11:02:49 amWow. The GBP107 for the bit of paper is really rubbing it in.QuoteOh God, Farnell. Are they still charging x3++ real prices for everything? It's over a decade since I bought from them. But I guess the important point is, do you have the original parts list from the course (with the FET missing), or could it just have been a Farnell screw up?Ordering single parts via Farnell, sure demonstrates the course organizers are either morons, or _trying_ to make the course cost as much as possible.QuoteOne suggestion - you might want to edit it down to just starting by explaining the situation, then showing the constructed circuit and the waveforms it produces. I had to skip a bit in the middle where you were trying to work out why 2V on the output. Too painful. The topic should be covered in 5 minutes. 35 minutes is too long - you'll lose almost everyone. The assignment (redraw and clearly show the circuit diagram you're supposed to construct - it's VERY important to show how dumb it is), the stupidly ordered and missing parts, the protoboard, the waveforms, and a quick "told you so". No need to sound so gloating about it.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 11:51:24 am
content: The idea was kind of to bore the pants off the so called tutors, might as well make them work for their money, this is my actual assignment response and not meant to give all the background.

author: nanofrog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 12:21:00 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on July 03, 2014, 11:51:24 amMight also just cause them to "glaze over" when watching it, and not see the mistakes. Thus allowing them to believe their refusals/denials of any faults in their course materials.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 12:24:46 pm
content: not my problem, their job is to mark it, I spent some time trying to get it to work as expected, not my fault if they gave me a stupid diagram that don't work, there was infact another 10 minutes during which I paused the camera.

author: nanofrog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 03:14:47 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on July 03, 2014, 12:24:46 pmI understand, and would be pissed in this type of situation myself.Just thinking of human nature in my previous post. Seems a tough combination to deal with IMHO, as it involves an acknowledgement of fault/error, as well as financial implications.

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 04:00:21 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on July 03, 2014, 07:04:28 amSimon, can you explain what that 'subject matter expert' thing? Is it some formal process defined by your government?In all my learning years I never seen anything like that. You just go to a class, pass or fail and move on.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 03, 2014, 04:24:57 pm
content: "subject matter expert" is ICS's way of trying to make it sound like they have a highly qualified person at their disposal when in fact they don't. I can't say they are lying about the qualifications of their staff because "subject matter expert" is not actually a qualification.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 09:01:21 am
content: I have spoken to trading standards in the UK and yep, i need to find my own expert to counter these clowns, so anyone game ? I can of course "show" a copy of the materials to someone, I'm just not going to be identified posting them online, after all I've not heard from a tutor so i need help from someone

author: KJDS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 09:06:45 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 09:01:21 amFrom a legal point of view, then you'll need someone not only with a lot of electronic knowledge but relevant experience of setting material for that type of course. You could try asking colleges where this course is taught face to face.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 09:33:22 am
content: The problem is that there is no one else in the UK providing a BTEC L3 in electronic engineering that I can find, I don't know how other institutions would respond to being asked to take another to task, I suppose i could try. the problem is that the entirety of our higher education is provided by private sector providers that only care about making money. What i need is an individual that wants to see justice done. The material is so bad that this is not a case of did they name the right topics for a BTEC L3 it's a case of name the topics is as far as they went in getting anything right, the rest of the material including the assignment is technically flawed so it's a case of right or wrong.

author: jancumps
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 09:54:13 am
content: The realpolitiker in me would just follow that training and try to get the certificate. It's being paid for.And when someone asks about the quality of that training, tell what you think about it.The refund is not going to work out, and the video isn't going to help eatheri liked that video though

author: bwat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 09:55:00 am
content: Now youtube have converted it so I can see the video.Playing devil's advocate here but do you think that maybe this circuit was designed so it would be easy for a student who didn't have a scope to demonstrate the difference between input and output with a voltmeter? Also, wouldn't an inverting switch (yep, it's not an amp) be more tolerant w.r.t. component values so these are not given and the student must figure out what works (learning by doing)?What equipment are you required to have at home?

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 09:57:06 am
content: The point is and as i have explained to my fellow students, if I want to go further than a BTEC L3 which i do then doing this course is pointless. I need to get onto a HNC and then a HND and for a HNC there are no entry requirements other than a L3 in maths that I will probably have to do. So if i wanted to stop here and trumpet my BTEC L3 then yes do it, but as i want to go beyond it is pointless and not required.

author: KJDS
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:01:35 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 09:33:22 amI put BTEC L3 electronic into google and got a dozen colleges that offer the course.Realistically, have a chat with your tutor. It looks to me as if that assignment was designed to make you think, rather than let you be spoon fed.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:02:53 am
content: Quote from: bwat on July 04, 2014, 09:55:00 amHold on so now you are suggesting that it is ok to supply an incorrect circuit to make it look like it's working therefor teaching me nothing as the circuits were not exactly explained in the course material anyway. So like i say providing I stuff some wires into a breadboard and flash a multimeter around i pass ? I'm not buying that. the circuit was supposed to be an amplifier and the values are not defined yet the course does not teach how to choose them.I was supplied a multimeter that works by estimating the RMS value of a perfect sine-wave up to 400Hz, I don't think that even qualifies as correct equipment as it would totally misread the distorted output and to make that output on average larger than the input and demonstrate that the circuit works requires the pulse to be so large that it will be severely distorted and they talk about distortion in the material so they can't have it both ways. Fact is to show the circuit working you need and oscilloscope, END OF, if your serious about this shit you will be getting one.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:06:30 am
content: Quote from: KJDS on July 04, 2014, 10:01:35 amI'm still waiting to be contacted by my tutor, it seems they are either on holiday or recovering from jetlag...........No the superficiality of the course has nothing to do with me thinking for myself, this mess is the result of me thinking for myself. The whole idea of the course is to be spoon fed, the assignment questions are asked in such a way that you can just go back to the material and copy stuff from it, the fact that I will not be externally assessed but get a certificate based on my "working on my own" to complete the assignment begs for me to blag it and get it done for me by someone else. on this course I would never have been properly assessed. It's a case of giving away certificates

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:08:09 am
content: Attached is a copy of their own forum, you can see that it's not just me

author: Codemonkey
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:11:45 am
content: I agree with KJDS, also there's nothing stopping you from simply drawing out the schematic they provided you with (DaveCAD style), and posting it so we can actually see what you're talking about. Also, in your original thread about looking for a course, I even linked to Chesterfield College's prospectus showing they ran the course, so to say no one offers is is not true.If I were in your shoes, my first step would not to try and be a smart arse (sorry, but that's the impression you're giving in your holier than thou video), it would be simply to A) Request the missing FET from the kit supplied to you (have you even checked if any of the other students got it in their kits ?), and then B) Do EXACTLY as the instructions say. If they tell you to test it with a multimeter, do so. To say you cant test the amp with one is simply incorrect. If you put in a small voltage change to the input of your circuit, and you get a big change in the output, its amplifying. Its quite possible that the whole point of this exercise is to see that a FET acts as a voltage amplifier. You may then go on to develop bias circuitry to get it to work properly.

author: bwat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:19:55 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 10:02:53 amIf the circuits were not fully explained then it may be down to the curriculum not requiring it. This is a BTEC L3 so that's roughly English A level right? Maybe amplifier design isn't something they want to cover at this stage.Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 10:02:53 amBut if the point of the exercise was to give you experience of building a circuit and choosing component values? This would explain the need for a video and the importance of the construction process over the actual function of the circuit.Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 10:02:53 amDo you really need an oscilloscope to demonstrate the behaviour of that circuit? Since you haven't answered my original question - "what equipment are you expected to have at home?" - we don't know if a signal generator is required. It may well be that the student is expected to give an alternating 9v/0v input and watch a voltmeter swing on the other end? No oscilloscope needed there.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:21:02 am
content: Quote from: Codemonkey on July 04, 2014, 10:11:45 amThe FET was not even shown on the kit list they publish in our student area, I don't care what they think, they are teaching incorrect methods, they have refered to using an oscilloscope but have given the impression that a multimeter can be used to do the same thing. Their diagram even makes it look like they want you to connect the multimeter between the input and output when they probably meant to use two multimeters or do it in two stages but were too lazy to draw correct diagrams. I can't see how asking me to make the wrong circuit so that it looks like it works is the correct way to teach and mark assignments.Yes your right there are many class based study places, I went off on a tangent as I'd not been able to find any distance learning courses except for these clowns

author: bwat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:24:31 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 10:21:02 amWouldn't that be a good verification that you had built the circuit correctly? If it's a inverting switch then the p.d. between the input and output would allow the tutor to easily determine correct construction.Honestly, I'm not having a go at you here.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:34:08 am
content: Quote from: bwat on July 04, 2014, 10:19:55 amAs i just said I don't see the point in supplying the wrong diagram just so that I can be seen building it. even if it was not in the scope of the course to explain how to design a transistor amplifier then fine they could provide CORRECT diagrams and say that is a transistor amplifier, they could then supply a CORRECT diagram with values and ask me to build it and show it working.The provided me with a multimeter, the online resource thing on their website has MP3 files to download, they supply 3.5mm to 3.5mm male cables and some PCB jacks that don't even fit into the breadboard but the idea was to use my computer as a signal source so equivalent to my signal generator but it was easier for me to use the sig gen than all that mess they provided plus the fact that the sockets won't fit a breadboard either.For all of the competence you seem to place on them after over a month of rasising concerns I still have not heard from a tutor to help put me on the right track assuming they are right and I'm wrong. on the 26 of June 2014 they wrote to me saying that my tutor would contact me to put me right and i'm still waiting. I got a call from dubai from a bloke on holiday but the line was so bad we could not understand each other so he emailed me from his personal email address as they make it otherwise very difficult to get in touch with a tutor, i have sent him my concerns regarding the assignment and still not heard back, the other tutor is recovering from jet-lag last i hearedOther questions in the assignment ask me to make a zener based voltage regulator (series resistor and zener diode). in an attempt to demonstrate a variable voltage input having no effect on the output they ask me to use a 10K pot as a variable voltage source to power a 1K load, needless to say it is next to impossible to get the thing to work and again the pot is not suitable for use with a breadboard. (apparently soldering is not a good idea as i might burn myself and of course it's not like they gave me one!)I have contact bedford college being my most local electronics college and asked if they have a tutor that would go over my concerns for me and assess the course which is what trading standards asked me to do because in this country consumer rights are a farce. As i was told this morning I have to provide evidence, tranding standards or rather consumer direct because trading standardss no longer deal with the public will not carry out any investigation!

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:38:56 am
content: Quote from: bwat on July 04, 2014, 10:24:31 amLook at the waveforms at the end of the video and tell me realistically what a cheap multimeter rated up to 400Hx and designed only to read pure sine will make of those 1KHz signals, would it even demonstrate any amplification. Because if we are going to be simplistic then demonstrating the circuit works amounts to having more average voltage on the output than the input which in this case cannot happen can it ?The better option if they wanted to do anything right and me to show that I can build the thing would be to omit the capacitors and use a DC in and measure the DC out and prove that the circuit inverts the input after all they did explain logic gates and i think show the basic transistor not gate.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:49:04 am
content: What I would do is..1). Keep a record of parts (materials) not provided; let them know in writing that IF they don't provide them you will forced to purchase them yourself; and will make a claim from them after the course is finished.2). If you think the material is of suspect quality or written by tw*ts then let them know that you would like to make an official complaint, then ask them their complaints procedure.I don't think they honestly want to provide a bad course; so complain at the highest level and get them to get it sorted out. You could get in touch with the "Open & Distance Learning Quality Council"http://odlqc.org.uk/to see if they could help youto put pressure on them.Goodluck, and nice to see you on utube! I would do some utubes if I actually knew what I was talking about and wasn't so big and ugly!

author: bwat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 10:52:34 am
content: You must understand how hard this is for us. You've spent days ignore requests for quite important information.Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 10:38:56 amYou ask this and then introduce this piece of new information:Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 10:34:08 amHow are we supposed answer the first question when we don't know if what's in the MP3 files? How do we know the first question is even relevant? More to the point, why are you not doing things the way you've been instructed to? We can't be asked to comment on the quality of one thing based on the demonstration of another.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 11:17:35 am
content: The provide sine wave MP3 files of varying frequencies up to a few KHz, I did exactly the same with my signal generator nothing unfair there. You asnwer my question, how would have those waveforms looked on a multimeter ? would i have demonstrated amplification ?

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 11:18:35 am
content: Quote from: jucole on July 04, 2014, 10:49:04 amI'll do that

author: bwat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 11:25:23 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 11:17:35 amNobody is accusing you of being unfair.Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 11:17:35 amWhy don't you do it and tell us?Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 11:17:35 amWe don't even know if you were required to demonstrate amplification.The point I'm trying to make is that:1) we're getting a story based on your assumptions about the course objectives, and2) we've never seen the task attempted as it was intended to be.Is this the first year the course has been run in its current form? If not, then I think you may be on the wrong foot w.r.t. point 1 and at least a few people have passed this task so it can be done.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 11:33:10 am
content: I was asked to show my circuit "working" again like most of the assignment very open and wooly questions, in my book working means that it amplifies, in theirs it may mean that the multimeter displays "something" in which case i might as well wave the probes around in the air and pick up mains hum.The diagram that corresponds to the circuit was posted earlier by another member, 1st page of the thread in "davecad" (TM), it has been agreed that the diagram does not constitute an amplifier, i was asked to wire that up while being videoed and show it "working" that was the question.Has anyone else passed ? Oh probably, after all the questions are so wooly that many answers can be deemed correct and it sounds like ICS are pretty free and easy with certificates. Another student is under the impression that the material was changed at the end of last year but I don't know why he thinks that.The course assignment is worded so that you can take excerpts from the so called teaching material and copy it with a few changed words to answer the questions so if your wondering if anyone has passed probably everyone with half a brain cell although there are some who struggle to understand how to use a breadboard.

author: bwat
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 11:45:10 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 11:33:10 amNow here we have an interesting piece of information. New courses tend to be buggy. I took a newly introduced course when studying at a top-end university. They ended up giving everyone an automatic pass and apologising saying the course would be withdrawn.Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 11:33:10 amYou're on a vocational course so it may very well be the case that you need to demonstrate that you can follow steps A, B, ..., X and pass. Actually, it's not just vocational courses, think of all the maths exams where you just need to replace the numbers in the example you got in class with the numbers you get in the exam then follow steps A, B, ...., X.Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 11:33:10 amThere's an interesting video on youtube with Alan Kay where he talks about standards being thresholds. He mentions how in California the school pupils are taught and examined on the fact that the atom is indivisible even though you can't find a physicist who believes that to be true.There's a mismatch between the learning outcomes of this course and your abilities. Get this course over and done with then get yersel to uni. You'll be happier in that environment.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 11:53:46 am
content: I have also been told, granted third hand that this is the overall standard of ICS Learn and their IT course is as bad.Buggy ? what do you mean by buggy ? this stuff was not even proof read for general textual clarity, the author cannot make up his mind if he is treating the reader as a degree student or a very basic beginner, For the simplicity of the course the amount of misinformation is horrendous. I have things like "a bjt transistor is a current controlled current" "a diode has a resistance" the description of how to use a zener is so wolly that no one would ever be able to select a zener, the fact that every topic ends with a link to the same information online makes it clear that the author did not give a shit about the quality of his work because he was going to send us online to jo bloggs hobby site and wikipedia or other learning institutions websites to read up the same topic and the same information again.the course amounts to purchasing a load of printed paper with jibberish on it, a list of links, and an assignment that providing you write something for each question you pass

author: Jay_Diddy_B
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 12:16:57 pm
content: Hi,I am not defending the course material that was supplied by ICS, I have not seen it.Traditionally the method used to teach amplifier design (with bipolar transistors) was start with a simple circuit and progress to a complete circuit:In the first circuit the BJT is biased with a single resistor. For this to work you have to know the current gain of the transistor, HFEto set the bias point.In the second circuit the operating is determined by the resistor values, and almost independent of HFE. The AC gain of the is low.In the third circuit the AC gain is defined by the ratio of the R8/R11 = 33The first amplifier is bad, it is intended to be bad, the circuit gets better as you add more parts.Simon,If you want to send me a PM with a DaveCad drawing of the circuit I will take a look at it.I found some great educational material here:http://my.ece.ucsb.edu/York/Bobsclass/Regards,Jay_Diddy_B

author: zapta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 02:29:48 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on July 03, 2014, 08:14:11 amSimon, you are a combative student. You need a Mr. Miyagi to get you the right attitude for learningThe classroom is one of the few places where the customer is never right.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 03:33:30 pm
content: Quote from: Jay_Diddy_B on July 04, 2014, 12:16:57 pmthey just abouts managed that for BJT amplifiers but with very little explanation, no math at all no way of calculating values just reasons for the parts, the FET amplifiers were even more badly explained and infact their common source amplifier is incorrect as it has no biasing so clearly the course author is an idiot

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2014, 03:36:17 pm
content: Quote from: zapta on July 04, 2014, 02:29:48 pmYea I don't have my time for bullshitall I ask for is a competent tutor and material

author: Jay_Diddy_B
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2014, 03:00:40 am
content: Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2014, 03:33:30 pmHere is the progression for a N Channel JFET amplifier, The 2N3819 is a depletion mode JFET so no biasing is necessary:The results for this circuit are:The result is the same, the simple circuits are more sensitive the JFETs characteristics than the more complicated ones.Regards,Jay_Diddy_B

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 05, 2014, 07:05:20 am
content: Well I have finally got a reply from the fkrst tutor (jet lagged guy) it sgarts as:Hi simon, I have been going through the detail of your comments & increasinglyin all cases I have been agreeing with them. & so going through the detail Ihave stated OK