Module 1 perception comment

[nicklawford]

I am just starting on the road to IRSE exams and - before registering with this forum several months ago - 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.

Last week I was at the IRSE YM meeting/seminar in London [*]. I found Paul Cheesemans' presentation useful , and the 2008 exam review, although I was not able to stay for all of it.

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, although I can see it covers a very very wide syllabus that could lead to almost anything coming up.

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.

All this now concerns me - if I am from the outside, why am I perceiving the opposite view to insiders ?

Comments ?

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.

Can anyone offer advice if thats a good or bad idea - some of the questions in Module 7 look spectacularly vague!!!

[*] thanks for Peter Woodbridge presentation too.

Regards

Nick

[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.

[nicklawford]

Thanks for the comprehensive reply, and for the time it must have taken you to do it.

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%

Having not sat anything since 1982, exam technique is big on my mind - and up to 1/3 marks of the whole is quite significant.

As you say module 1 and to a lesser extent module 7 are quite wide.

I can well believe that you might find them easier for you.

I am not really saying *any* of them are easy.

But put it like this, when I initially investigated IRSE past papers, I felt confident enough to tackle minimum one question of every Module 1 paper right away without needing more study.

Then I joined this forum - and found Module 1 regarded as the difficult one, which kind of sounded alarm bells of confidence.

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

Indeed.

Way too many exams perhaps. At least that is on my side, maybe.

In addition, I have no pressure from my employer or managers in respect of which modules, nor when I take them - it is my choice through a personal development program, and not a ''must do''. However, this does mean zero study time, its all in my time, which I don't have a problem with.

My idea, for now, remains one module in 2009 and one or two (depending on how the first one goes) more in 2010; but that all might slip to 2010 and 2011 respectively.

--
Nick

[PJW]

Having not sat anything since 1982, exam technique is big on my mind - and up to 1/3 marks of the whole is quite significant.

Indeed it is a large element. For modules 2 and 3 Control Tables you basically have no choice of questions but they are probably the most severe speed tests. Absolutely essential to practice to shave off a few seconds here and there; it all adds up. For the written questions in the other modules then allocating your equally time to each question and then subdividing your time to the available marks within each question is key. Making sure you are answering the question asked is essential. For module1 in particular, choice of questions (Seeing there are just the two) is especially important.

I am not really saying *any* of them are easy.
When I initially investigated IRSE past papers, I felt confident enough to tackle minimum one question of every Module 1 paper right away without needing more study.

A very good sign; a lot of people "don't know where to start" so at least you feel that the exam is do-able. It's a pure guess of course but I think in your case you are probably right, but just a note of caution. I helped someone with mod3 Control Tables some years ago; initial knowledge extremely basic. Meanwhile they studied for mod1 by themselves; far more familiar territory. They did exam and I got very apologetic email: knew they had muffed mod 3, but the better news was that "hoping for at least a credit" for mod1. Results came out: mod3 Pass; mod1 Fail. I think one of the factors is that I probably was teaching at the high Credit/ low Distinction level and they knew they had fallen well short. For mod1 they perhaps fif not have a yardstick. Can I suggest that the do really write an answer for a question that you think you can do reasonably, get feedback from this website or elsewhere in order to get some "calibration".

Then I joined this forum - and found Module 1 regarded as the difficult one, which kind of sounded alarm bells of confidence.

There are alarm bells with good reason. You are perhaps rather different to many and it may well be that not applicable to your circumstances. However you may share the problem of being "new"; you may have seen an example of something but as yet have no way of knowing whether it represents "typical" or one extreme or the other of something- danger of over-generalising from the particular. You may see a question and THINK you know what it is asking because you know about one facet of a multi-faceted problem; you might then do a good answer in your terms but "not have seen the half of it".

I have no pressure from my employer or managers in respect of which modules, nor when I take them - it is my choice through a personal development program, and not a ''must do''. However, this does mean zero study time, its all in my time, which I don't have a problem with.

My idea, for now, remains one module in 2009 and one or two (depending on how the first one goes) more in 2010; but that all might slip to 2010 and 2011 respectively.

Agreed- you are more in control rather than responding to external pressure. I definitely suggest 2009 is good year to study for Module 1 particularly as you must be London based. Take advantage of what Paul Cheeseman and Doug Young are organising- it may well be a "one-off" for this year. Even if don't intend to sit any of the others then I'd start learning for one (perhaps mod5) since not only will it get you started on something more "siganlling technical" but it will help support mod1 re railwway signalling domain knowledge which presumably is a weak area otherwise.
--
Nick
[/quote]

[nicklawford]

Having not sat anything since 1982, exam technique is big on my mind - and up to 1/3 marks of the whole is quite significant.

Indeed it is a large element.

Absolutely essential to practice to shave off a few seconds here and there; it all adds up.

For module1 in particular, choice of questions (Seeing there are just the two) is especially important.

When I initially investigated IRSE past papers, I felt confident enough to tackle minimum one question of every Module 1 paper right away without needing more study.

A very good sign; a lot of people "don't know where to start" so at least you feel that the exam is do-able. It's a pure guess of course but I think in your case you are probably right,

Yesterday deciding to stay in the warm I timed myself on a Module1 paper.

My conclusion is exam technique is going to hit me initially.

It is no exaggeration to say I am *way* off target on timing. And I mean way off.

What I did was to go against the clock, mark on my answers where I reached the time allowed .... but I then continued to complete my answers after time. The reason for that was to see if I could at least provide an adequate answer outside of time constraints and work on speeding it up.

Don't have access to a scanner at home, will try and get scans done at work and uploaded for comment; you'll be able to see where I got to against the clock as well as the full answer outside of time.



--
Nick

[PJW]

It is no exaggeration to say I am *way* off target on timing. And I mean way off.

What I did was to go against the clock, mark on my answers where I reached the time allowed .... but I then continued to complete my answers after time. The reason for that was to see if I could at least provide an adequate answer outside of time constraints and work on speeding it up.
--
Nick

You are right that you first (i.e. assuming that you actually already know the basic material you need) ought to get experience in answering the question and then worry about being able to do so in the time limit. You are probably well ahead of most people since in very general terms I would say that:
Jan - April are for reading and learning basic material to get to a level where one can tackle some questions,
May - July are for attempting questions without time pressure and also expanding knowledge as you find you need to by actually attempting to answer
August - September are really for refining technique against the clock.

So yes as and when you can scan then post

[Douglas]

I haven't been able to read everything before, but in brief: I took the exam as a relatively new entrant to the industry and I struggled with M1 - failed it. M7 I seeemed to pass ok arguably because of the predictability of the questions, and I believe that M5 is similar though I never sat it. I passed M3 with quite a bit of studdying and M2 too, I even got a distinction there. With a few more years industry experience, and having passed other Ms which I studied hard for - and learned a lot about the railway as a result - I was then able to pass M1, though it was still achallenge.

Perhaps for someone in your position M1 would require less additional work to get through, truth is M1 is different for each of us, and each year is different.

Good luck!

[nicklawford]

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.

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.

Peter raised this point with me during our conversation before the IRSE London Technical Meeting last Wednesday.

As a result, I timed using Ye Olde Technique Of Holdinge Ye Quille To Parchemente and fill two sides of A4 ... and I am sure slower than I used to be ... and much much slower than must have been through O-levels and A-levels and Degree where one got twice annual (mocks and the real thing) practice every year from age 12 for 10 or so years. I am able to produce sketches and graphs - having done this for work purposes over many years it has not lapsed out of practice.

Clearly this is something I am going to have to fully practice ... it is not something I had considered I would be up against, so attempting a timed paper 6 months ahead of an exam has highlighted an extremely weak area for myself.

Have any older ''young'' members experienced similar difficulties ?

--
Nick

[Jerry1237]

I took four modules in one day. By lunchtime it was difficult to hold the pen for the 1 1/2 hrs per exam. At the end of the day I was utterly fatigued, headachy and glad just not to be doing anything more that day.

With regard to technique:
1) use the reading time to understand what the question is asking and whether you can answer it sufficiently well to gain marks!
2) limit the time you answer a question. If there are three answers needed in 1 1/2 hr, take no more than 30 mins/question.
3) answer where you'll receive the highest marks first.
4) practice, practice and practice.
5) practice some more.
6) get peer feedback, use study groups, practice!

The exam is hard. If it wasn't it wouldn't be worth doing. The kudos and industry acceptance of the exam makes the gain far greater than the pain.

J

[nicklawford]

I took four modules in one day. By lunchtime it was difficult to hold the pen for the 1 1/2 hrs per exam.


4) practice, practice and practice.
5) practice some more.

The exam is hard. If it wasn't it wouldn't be worth doing.

Thanks Jerry. This part of exam technique looks like I have identified early on as a possible difficulty - but early enough to do something about it. Perhaps my slowness on my personal timed attempt at the module was a symptom of pen holding. Whatever it was it does need practice. Not something I was expecting to be up against. Indeed, I was not suggesting any of these things are easy - when I used that term up thread it was meant to be read as a relative term thats all.

--
Nick