How hard is the day skipper theory exam

[timbartlett]

I am trying to get a better working knowledge of the Colregs and it is rather turgid going without the human interaction of a bearded master,only dry books and CD-ROMS etc.

Can't offer you any ideas for courses, I'm afraid, but I do know of a book -- hopefully not too dry -- that was written by a genuine bearded master !
http://www.rya.org.uk/shop/pages/product.aspx?pid=g2(RYADefaultCatalog)

 

[Lady Campanula]

If you have GCSE Maths and English or feel you have equivalent knowledge you can do the course.

If you do the course and put in the time to do the exercises and learn the factual stuff you will have no trouble with the exam.[/QUOTE]

As yet another 'instructor' who helped steer several hundred relative beginners through the Day Skipper Shorebased Course, and on to enjoy 'day sailing in inshore waters and clement weather', I can assure you that you will certainly manage the course provided you can read the texts and do simple arithmetic, do the exercises, and tell the tutor if/when you don't grasp a concept immediately. Most students 'don't get it' about something or other the first time round. That's a task for the tutor to resolve, but s/he needs to know from you.

There are 'ladies only' DS courses taught by skilled lady tutors, which some find helpful. Ask the RYA for info if you're interested.

The course is designed and intended for relative beginners - although it helps considerably if students have been sailing on a boat once or twice and have seen some of the stuff the course touches on. Read through a copy of the course study booklet in advance - it's first-rate.

Some of the best value on the course comes from the interaction between students. I was asked, on several occasions, to recommend a practical sailing school for the 'next stage'. While I had no personal connections, I was able to persuade a Principal from one sea-school or another to come and give a short illustrated talk. That usually resulted in a favourable-rate course booking, and one course negotiated a 'series of practical weekends' out of season at very attractive rates.

So, yes you can!

 

[timbartlett]

Exactly. So why no standalone navigation theory exams?

Dunno.
Possibly because, in spite of the essentially practical nature of all its courses, forums like this already promulgate the myth that the RYA is all about theory taught by people who have never done the real thing.

Just imagine what would happen if they actually offered a purely theoretical course and exam .

 

[Bosun Higgs]

Is there any reason why the theory could not be tested in standalone exams, too, rather than forcing candidates to take courses?

Your knowledge of the theory can be tested in stand alone exams - thats what happens if you take the practical course without the theory course completion cert. The theory courses are simply designed to take you through those parts of the syllabus that can more easily be taught sat at a desk and without the distraction of sailing a boat.

With that in mind, you dont pass an exam and get a qualificfation - you attend a course and get a course completion certificate. Assessment of your progress and understanding is continuous during the course and at the end " the instructor has to decide whether the student has understood the concepts taught and has sufficient knowledge to start converting the theory into practice" to quote the RYA. The only pass / fail element of either course is the colregs test for the YM theory where you must achieve 80%. There is no pass mark on the rest of the YM or DS end of course tests .

In terms of academic level I wouldnt put either course any higher than a GCSE if that. So the OP should relax. He will cope with the course, will learn and enjoy and will come away with a bit of paper.

 

[alant]

Exactly. So why no standalone navigation theory exams?

Maybe its because people without any understanding of the other essentials - I.R.P.C.S, commonly known as collision regs or rules of the road, would when happily engaged in practical navigation, be bumping into the rest who did have some knowledge.

 

[Bosun Higgs]

They are on that paper, allowed to use RYA Chart 4 + Practice Almanac ONLY for reference.

So the question of needing to look up the colregs answers doesnt come up - they simply cant do so.

You may chose to give someone a re-test for getting wrong the answers to the colregs questions in the DS test papers but unless it has changed since I last did an instructors briefing course, there is no requirement to do so. Mind you, if any candidate got wrong the very basic colreg questions in a DS paper, I would see that as a reflection on the instructor as much as the candidate.

 

[alant]

Writing as a student of sailing,shortly to attempt my YM Coastal Exam,this is a fascinating discussion. I would welcome the introduction of a shore-based course teaching the Colregs and Chartwork to a higher level than that provided in the YM Theory course. For Met there are various higher level courses already available elsewhere. (In general I thought the YM Theory was well-pitched,I`m not implying it is lacking).
I am trying to get a better working knowledge of the Colregs and it is rather turgid going without the human interaction of a bearded master,only dry books and CD-ROMS etc.
If anyone reading this could suggest a course taking me deeper into the Colregs,preferably testing my knowledge, if any, with an exam,I would be grateful. Perhaps something like an `O` level,but it doesn`t seem to exist. Thanks in advance for any suggestions,Jerry.

The book favoured by many, including the RN, is a little blue & fat 'self teaching' book, entitled "A Seaman's Guide to the RULE OF THE ROAD".

Has a section that teaches + section where if you wish, you can learn verbatum.

 

[alant]

Is it RYA policy to undermine peoples confidence by instilling a sense of trepidation and fear about their capabilites? Or did you come up with this on your own?




Good Plan! Aim low, dont encourage anyone to exceed their expectation because that way no-one will fail and no one will question the quality of their instruction....



Yes that has become clear to me now... the course is dumbed down not for the students.. (Heaven forbid they would like a challenge...) but for the instructors.. (Heaven forbid they would like a challenge..)






Of course only the RYA can recognise errors! And only its way is the right way!




No wonder people think this is a elitist sport when at the very core of the governing body lies a instutional arrogance borne of a deep rooted belief in their own superiority.

I despair. I relate my experience, as requested by the OP... and I am castigated for not instilling fear!

Keep digging!

 

[Ubergeekian]

Your knowledge of the theory can be tested in stand alone exams - thats what happens if you take the practical course without the theory course completion cert. The theory courses are simply designed to take you through those parts of the syllabus that can more easily be taught sat at a desk and without the distraction of sailing a boat.

Sure. I'm just wondering why they don't make a stand-alone exam available. In view of the comments about time wasted by practical course instructors on people who don't know the theory, would they not like to be able to say "theory pass required for this course"?

With that in mind, you dont pass an exam and get a qualificfation - you attend a course and get a course completion certificate.

Not now, but when I did DS and CS theory there certainly were exams!

Maybe its because people without any understanding of the other essentials - I.R.P.C.S, commonly known as collision regs or rules of the road, would when happily engaged in practical navigation, be bumping into the rest who did have some knowledge.

Sorry, I don't follow. What's that got to do with offering a standalone exam in the theory as well as the combined tuition/assessment?

 

[Grumpybear]

The RYA discourages the approach of going straight to the YM theory but it is still allowed. The reason they discourage is not what the cynical might think but the problem of trying to teach YM theory to two levels of student in the same class - those who have done DS and those who are completely new. But there is absolutely no reason why you copuldnt go direct to YM theory if everyone in the class were starting the same way.

As an instructor I have refused to accept YM candidates who dont have a DS for this reason. My one exception was a commissioned naval officer and that was a mistake - the level of seamanship knowledge given to engineering officers at Dartmouth is poor.

As for the RYA, direct your cynicism at the very idea of having both DS and YM. I believe there should be YM only

As an ex RN engineer officer (Dartmouth 1968-9) I think you are overgeneralising. I have also served with some seaman officers who seamanship was truly appalling!

 

[Ubergeekian]

As an ex RN engineer officer (Dartmouth 1968-9) I think you are overgeneralising. I have also served with some seaman officers who seamanship was truly appalling!

 

[alant]

So the question of needing to look up the colregs answers doesnt come up - they simply cant do so.

You may chose to give someone a re-test for getting wrong the answers to the colregs questions in the DS test papers but unless it has changed since I last did an instructors briefing course, there is no requirement to do so. Mind you, if any candidate got wrong the very basic colreg questions in a DS paper, I would see that as a reflection on the instructor as much as the candidate.

"General Notes to Instructors"

"GOOD: No significant errors
AVERAGE: The student has shown that he understands the principle on which he has been tested, although the work does contain some significant errors.
FAIR: Errors in principle in up to half the answers.
POOR: Errors in principle in over half the answers.

* Students who are given a FAIR or POOR rating for an invigilated paper may be offered a re-test using another exercise of similar standard. Re-tests are only permitted when the previous course work has been satisfactory."

'You can lead a horse to water, but you can't MAKE him drink!'

 

[alant]

Sure. I'm just wondering why they don't make a stand-alone exam available. In view of the comments about time wasted by practical course instructors on people who don't know the theory, would they not like to be able to say "theory pass required for this course"?



Not now, but when I did DS and CS theory there certainly were exams!



"Sorry, I don't follow. What's that got to do with offering a standalone exam in the theory as well as the combined tuition/assessment?"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Originally Posted by alant
Maybe its because people without any understanding of the other essentials - I.R.P.C.S, commonly known as collision regs or rules of the road, would when happily engaged in practical navigation, be bumping into the rest who did have some knowledge."
--------------------------------

"Sorry, I don't follow. What's that got to do with offering a standalone exam in the theory as well as the combined tuition/assessment?"

So, you want an exam/course specifically on nav theory, but leave everything else out?

Aren't the other bits just as important?

 

[photodog]

So, you want an exam/course specifically on nav theory, but leave everything else out?

Aren't the other bits just as important?

Your supposed to be a instructor Al, Why dont you just answer a simple question with a straight explanation?

 

[alant]

Your supposed to be a instructor Al, Why dont you just answer a simple question with a straight explanation?

OK.

1) So, you want an exam/course specifically on nav theory, but leave everything else out?

Aren't the other bits just as important?

2) On both DS & CS/YM courses, there IS a "stand alone exam in the theory"

It's called the "Chartwork Assessment" exam/paper.

Hope that clarifies it.

 

[Elessar]

The calculation of secondary port tidal heights is all very well but you usually end up with an answer such as '1.2376m.....and allow a couple of foot for safety'.

In fact a lot of the RYA stuff is like that. When doing RYA plotting exercises the only way to get the 'right' answer is to use the nearest diamond, even though it is clear the topography means the area of the diamond is doing something totally different.

From a point of view of wanting qualifications it is important to know the approved ways of doing things but for someone who just wants to know how to sail safely, is it necessary to learn the official methods only to go on to the shorthand version that most experienced people use?

As an experienced sailor helping someone else to get started, would you for example start them off on tidal diamonds or would you show them how to use the tidal stream atlas and chartlets?

Alan T has eloquently explained why you need to specify whether to use the diamonds or the atlas for an exercise. Beats me you would not want to know how to do both just for interest even if you tend to use only one.

You would be amazed how many experienced sailors show their friends how to navigate, and propagate significant errors.

For example, HW Dover is at 1200, what time does the page HW+1 in the atlas represent? Not a trick question, but many will get it wrong.

 

[Ubergeekian]

So, you want an exam/course specifically on nav theory, but leave everything else out?

Aren't the other bits just as important?

I'm suggesting an exam on all the theory - like the one I (and it seems you) did years ago at the end of a course.

 

[Elessar]

Can't offer you any ideas for courses, I'm afraid, but I do know of a book -- hopefully not too dry -- that was written by a genuine bearded master !
http://www.rya.org.uk/shop/pages/product.aspx?pid=g2(RYADefaultCatalog)

For those who haven't got it this is a genuinely good book! Should be compulsory on every boat.

Its genius is the way it can be read at any level, from beginner basic to advanced. I often go back to it.

 

[Grumpybear]

Quite.

in my experience, RN engineers were much more likely to take up sailing than fishheads, perhaps because it gave them a chance to be in command rather than be on the receiving end of Bligh like rantings.

 

[Lady Campanula]

As an ex RN engineer officer (Dartmouth 1968-9) I think you are overgeneralising. I have also served with some seaman officers who seamanship was truly appalling!

Speaking of which, I've travelled a fair few thousand sea miles in the company of an ex-Dartmouth engineer officer, who has for a few years now been a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical Engineers.

When I recently had occcasion to look behind a 'lecky panel on his boat to trace a fault or two, this is what greeted me....

I understand - but hope I'm mistaken - that he spent some time in nuclear-powered submarines....