Module 1 perception comment

[PJW]

I was thinking and planning that I would start with Module 1. After all, it is the compulsory module. Then I studied the threads in this forum, where indications are that Module 1 is the hardest.
Perhaps because of my background - I only entered the rail industry 2 years ago - I am not convinced Module 1 can be the hardest exam.
If I am from the outside, why am I perceiving the opposite view to insiders ?

The important thing is that the IRSE Exam purposely makes candidates demonstrate BROAD competence including areas of the profession that they have never worked in; hence some will find some easier, other students will prefer other modules.

I regard that all modules require understanding / competence in various areas: RAILWAYS, SIGNALLING/TELECOMMS, GENERAL ENGINEERING, EXAM TECHNIQUE. Overall I'd rate the relative weightings as 20%, 35%, 15%, 30% but the modules do vary. Module2 and in particular the CT option in module3 really don't cover general engineering at all, but modules 1&7 compensate for that and often require less detail of the specific to the S&T technical area. So these probably suit you whereas others (who may have come from school, perhaps via college and have been trained for and do a particular job) often very much prefer the other modules.

As you say module 1 and to a lesser extent module 7 are quite wide. Experience is the key; you can do them by dint of a lot of reading, but it is not like having "lived it". If you have a significant career behind you in a not too dissimilar environment and have become familiar enough with the railway environment to recognise which is appropriate and where things may be different, I can well believe that you might find them easier for you. In the exam you only have to do 3 out of about 10; you do not need to be able to tackle them all, though of course you should go into the exam feeling that you ought to be able to do 50% of all the questions in the recent Past Papers to give you some leeway to choose the best on the day- it can be unpredictable what comes up and in what combination within any one question.

Module 2 and the Control Tables particularly in Module 3 are very predictable; yes the layouts vary and there is always something "special" but if you prepare for them you are not going to fail just because of what was asked. You can be trained to pass them- there are course for the Mainline (I think the equivalent for Metro has rather fallen by the wayside since LU privatisation but I keep hearing rumours of intention to revive- perhaps Metronet becoming part of TfL may be the spur?). OK there is no real "exam text book" for them, though the Mod2 Study Pack intention gets pretty close at least for Mainline.

There really couldn't be the same sort of thing for mod 1 & 7. For some years the Mod1 exam became very focussed on Yellow Book and in some years the need for knowledge of railways all but vanished- I think the questions now are far more valid BUT it isn't as easy for the student without experience. Since it is a professional entrance exam it does not seem unreasonable to me that it does differentiate between those with experience and those without. The problem is that some employers may be putting pressure (perhaps through desire for promotion) on their staff to do the exam too soon without giving necessary support (and that does not mean giving study leave and paying exam entry fees).

I think that Module 1 is unpredictable. I feel that someone who gets a Credit one year could Fail the next. Partly I put this down to there only being 2 rather than 3 questions, but it is not only that. Take two graduates joining the same training scheme at the same time, based in the same office. Different people of course, exposed to some different things over the 2 years but otherwise comparable. Person A attempts Mod 1 and Mod 5 after some 18 months and sits mod7 just because so similar to mod1 and in those days marginal extra cost; got at least a Pass in all. Person B waits a bit until actually working in a role well aligned to the subject area- and Fails. Puts a lot of effort in for the next year, gets a Pass but only that. Person A's best result in any module was Credit; person B got a Distinction in module2 for a subject area that never really worked in. I am sure that there are reasons and perhaps exam technique enters into it, but variability in the exam must also be relevant I feel. I am not saying the exam itself is easier overall one year or another, but that it does depend quite a bit on luck what questions come up and also how "tuned in" the candidate is to what the examiner is looking for. It may be that this is where experience counts, but luck is certainly there as well.

Module 5 is possibly one of the easiest for many people, though there does seem to be a bit of a shift towards the mod7 end of the spectrum; system architecture rather than the more detail descriptive re a point machine, signal head etc that was more of the exam in years past. No course or textbook for the totality but plenty of specific training and literature relating to separate elements.

Or perhaps it is because I am working inside the London underground environment, currently on modern control systems, including tbtc. To me, to take one example, main line multiple aspect signalling is something way outside my area of work and experience, so I have no day-to-day practical experience to base theory for other Modules upon.

It is actually considered permissible (although the exam wording still needs to catch up) to offer signalling such as tbtc; I know that at least one person did so some years ago. Indeed since the examiners won't be too familiar with it not how much or what would be appropriate to an IRSE exam answer, provided it seemed to address the high level requirements and it looked that you knew what you were doing then you'd probably get away with it. I intended, but have yet to attempt, to signal a layout with ETCS. Indeed I have even wondered whether I'd enter the real exam and do it, just to see what the examiners made of it; trouble is that the exam always seems to be on the Saturday of my father's birthday or I'd really be tempted just for the hell of it.

On top if this is the fact that I have not sat down and taken one single formal exam since my engineering degree finals in 1982.

I have yet to decide if I am going to take any exam in 2009 (I am aware of the registration deadline) because of other factors that might take priority, it might have to be 2010. If I do have to defer to 2010 then it has crossed my mind to try Modules 1 and 7 together at the same time.
Regards
Nick

You are right; this could be a significant issue. Once you get to our age........it is not only failing memory and less agile brain in the exam but much else besides. We have got out of the habit of studying, don't have the luxury that some new graduates on a 2 year training programme have, could have more responsibilities both at work and home. Far too sweeping generalisations of course, but yes there are definitely issues. However we do have advantages- Newton's Laws of Motion, Ohm's & Kirchoff's laws are still in force and we learnt them. We did lots of exams rather than projects and continual assessments and a university back then was different to most today in that we were taught to THINK rather more than we were taught to do an exam. However we are well out of the habit of holding a pen and doing a significant amount of writing; we just don't do it nowadays and it is physically hard- I expect the younger people find it a strain as well.

So no black and white answer, but certainly some comments......

What about some other perspectives from others?


PS
Since you already have membership, there are a good few months left before you need to register for the exam itself. Early registration gives the advantage of Study pack but otherwise you can leave it until you have got to the stage of actually attempting past papers to decide.