2392 inspection and testing??

[Badged01]

Sorry guys, but the 2394/5 are not a "watered down" 2391. The pass rates for both 4 & 5 are not significantly better that for 2391,

Just wish I could have split the 2391 into two bits rather than having to understand/remember everything for just one exam!

Or does it say a lot about the 'candidates' training in that if even only having to understand half of GN3 for that particular exam ( initial or periodic) in the same time as the 2391(?) that they still cant get a better pass rate than the old sweats who had to understand both at one sitting ....... or have I missed something and the two new seperate exams have discovered some harder form of testing than we had for the 2391?!?!

Or perhaps the scope of the whole testing has now expanded a further level and its the 2391 candiadates who had it easier because their questions were watered down? ...... or maybe Im just an oldy cynic who shouldnt question the system!

 

[polo1]

Tbh, I'm not saying one is harder/easier than the other, just that 2394/5 are not a poor relation. I could really put the cat amongst the pigeons, by saying that neither the old or new C&G's were/are exactly rocket science, especially if you put the work in to really understand the theories & practice. After all, a lot of it is a memory test, rather than a true test of ability. Even the practical elements of both should present no major challenge to a competent spark!

 

[ChrisElectrical88]

Unfortunately though, like myself people who missed out on the 2491 now have no choice but to do these exams. Even though I have the 2394 and 2395 I still see the 2391 as a superior qualification. Looking forward to doing the 2396 design next year.

 

[polo1]

"... I still see the 2391 as a superior qualification." Why?

 

[Southern22]

It wasn't done to make it easier to pass, it was done so the training and exams could go into more detail. It also allows people to choose one qualification depending on their line of work if both aren't relevant

 

[cpugwash]

the industry standard to qualify as an electrician is level 3(wether c&g or nvq) so to be qualfied to test should also be the same. or is some work level 2? ie part p, 6 week ,electricians etc

 

[Badged01]

It wasn't done to make it easier to pass, it was done so the training and exams could go into more detail.

Now I do feel inadequate compared to the new exam passers! They know more about inspecting and testing than the old sweats who passed the 2391 do.

Can I respectfully ask that you keep this quiet so employers dont realise how inadequate the 2391 guys are compared to the new guys?

Thank-you in advance ......

 

[Badged01]

I still see the 2391 as a superior qualification.

It probably isnt but Im just struggling getting my head around why we need to split it into two?. The principles/standards of inspecting & testing etc ... aren't any different now than before, you cant alter the physics of what its trying to achieve!

I just feel we are trying to water down the qualification into bite size pieces to enable more people to pass -- and generate more money thro' more courses and exams?!?!

Please, someone correct me if Im total askew and have lost the plot completely!!

 

[polo1]

I think as you and others have said, it's more money for colleges/training firms and C&G. If it was to improve the pass rate, the idea has failed miserably.

 

[skydog23]

Being one that has had the opportunity of passing the 2391 in 2006 and then sitting the 2394 and 2395 this year to satisfy a requirement of a resent employer ( paid for by them)
I can say that both are similar and if anything I found the 2391 easier as it was only one exam with half the amount of questions. But with that said, it did have to be done in one exam.
If your competent in wot your doing and understand testing and inspection, together with having gn3 to relate/refer to at your disposal, your basically doing the exam every time your doing your certs and test results. And having the privilege of being open book when you do.
Both will always be respected in the industry and will continue to be even if it changes again in years to come.
It not like my dad's harder than your dad. It's like we know what we're doing and we can prove it.

 

[Badged01]

.... passing the 2391 in 2006 and then sitting the 2394 and 2395 this year to satisfy a requirement of a resent employer .....

Unfortunately I think anyone remaining in the industry holding the 2391 is going to have to do the 2394/2395 in the future for exactly the reason you stated.

I can just hear the young girl at the recruiting agency ...."but my book says unless you have a 2394/2395 you cant inspect and test. Whats a 2391?"