City and Guilds (dont forget the Others EAL/LCL/Napit)

[AngelLaHash]

Not really a Question but its more a Point that the other Education Bodies out there than City and Guilds
Granted most Employment agency dont know this askign for NVQ3 and 2391
my fav is asking for 18th Edtion IEE Wiring Regs (always makes me smile, sad life i know)

Now the 2391 the Gold Standard has a lot of different parts
2391-01 Award in Initial Verifications & Certifcation of Electrical Installations
2391-01/08 Certificate in Inspection, Testing Certification of Electrical Installations
2391-02 Certificate in Design, Erection & Verification of Electrical Installations
2391-10 Certificate in the Certification of Electricall Installations (Design< rerection & Verification of Electrical Installions)
2391-20 Certificate in Design, Erection & Verification of Electrical Instllations.
2391-50 Award is Initial Verification of Electrical Installations
2391-51 Award in Periodic Inspection & Testing of Electrical Installations
2391-52 Award in Initial and Periodic Inspection and Testing of Electrical Installations

but you have other Bodies Including EAL, LCL and Napit
as far as i understand City and Guilds made 2391 close book where others had it open book
maybe why in my day 2391 (Pre 2394/5 split and they formed back together like some boy band) had a 40% pass rate
must of the testing and fault finding i felt i had done on my 2330 and a LOT of City & Guilds link over

 

[Vortigern]

Fortunately or otherwise I did the 2391 at a point where there were six written questions/answers. I understand that the 2391 (original)
had a pass rate of 30%. Think i just passed. I heard stories of people not attending the exam in large numbers due to the difficulty of it. As colleges had such a poor pass rate, they split it up. Not only that, currently it is on-line and multiple choice and open book (I think) As a result of these changes the pass rate went up to 70% (again, I think) Whether this means the whole method is dumbed down or it is legitimately broken up to be more viable to succeed I am not too sure.
When I did the written exam it was closed book with C&G. I think they now have open book. It was even the case that employers preferred C&G passes when it was closed book as of course you did have to know something about electricity to pass! Anyway despite this storm in a teacup there are still people out there with and without qualifications/experience doing dangerous work. Despite higher level requirements to join a scheme to stop poor work being executed. I feel the trend toward requiring a more thorough exam regime is the right way to go. I would add that in the 2391 days it was already thorough and if it had stayed as it was then people passing were really people who did know something about the work they were doing.
Being retired now, it is not so much a subject of great importance to me, but still keeping abreast of the whole development of the exam and experience structure thing.

 

[AngelLaHash]

Fortunately or otherwise I did the 2391 at a point where there were six written questions/answers. I understand that the 2391 (original)
had a pass rate of 30%. Think i just passed. I heard stories of people not attending the exam in large numbers due to the difficulty of it. As colleges had such a poor pass rate, they split it up. Not only that, currently it is on-line and multiple choice and open book (I think) As a result of these changes the pass rate went up to 70% (again, I think) Whether this means the whole method is dumbed down or it is legitimately broken up to be more viable to succeed I am not too sure.
When I did the written exam it was closed book with C&G. I think they now have open book. It was even the case that employers preferred C&G passes when it was closed book as of course you did have to know something about electricity to pass! Anyway despite this storm in a teacup there are still people out there with and without qualifications/experience doing dangerous work. Despite higher level requirements to join a scheme to stop poor work being executed. I feel the trend toward requiring a more thorough exam regime is the right way to go. I would add that in the 2391 days it was already thorough and if it had stayed as it was then people passing were really people who did know something about the work they were doing.
Being retired now, it is not so much a subject of great importance to me, but still keeping abreast of the whole development of the exam and experience structure thing.

got to be honest just reading 6 Written Question panic me, (im dyslexic so got extra time)
and a pass rate of 30% and to pass is WELL impressive (BOW to someone who managed to do that)

i got to say Closed book and Passing does mean DAM you know it. But i also think that if anything has changed (and i dont think it will change) I think the Wiring Regs being open book is a good thing as that does change a LOT!!
i did 2330 offf my own back found it very easy as i come from a electronics background. But being able to get HANDS on site experice is DAM DAM important , testing in a class where light is 20cm away and the CU is just 10cm way doesnt get you ready for being a Electrician.. they need to put you in a Swet box too with insulation just to give a real feel to the job. But i do seem to find some New guys Rabbit of things they heard or know. 2.5mm Sockets ..1.5mm lights
I had a Manager asked for Zs (note this was a Bathroom) so dont know the Ze as i dont know the system its being installed in, i dont know the R1 or R2 because all i have is my Little Bits fo Cable going to a Junction box to be hooked up to the CU.

 

[Vortigern]

Recently did a job with new building techniques, at least to my experience. Dropped ceiling and metal studs in wals and ceiling. Insulation in ceiling/walls. Around 100mm space above plasterboard ceiling. The original ceiling also had 100mm insulation directly above. Now putting wires above suspended ceiling is either method 101/102 meaning RFC (usually 2.5T&E) should not be used where it is deemed it is method 101 as rating drops to 17 A. Anyway I deemed it to be 101 and upped the cable size to 4mm. The builders did not seem too happy with this. In their understanding/experience all the previous electricians they used 2.5mm² I said "well the installation did not comply with BS7671" and went ahead. I use software to crunch the factors and 4mm came up as apt. So it seems "electricians" generally accept that 2.5 is adequate. I don't think so. It does of course depend on how you see the installation, i.e. is it 101 or 102 method? I did actually go for belt and braces and choose 101, and came on the forum to garner opinion from my betters who on the whole agreed 101. So yeah, I suspect someone did not bother to do the calcs and went for customary "deemed to satisfy" method. So poor practice does go on even with electricians. I try not to be like that and take the time to be sure and overcompensate at very little cost really.