RECENT C & G 2382 question

[SgtTrojan]

Table 54.8 has the note so the answer is only B. B points you to the note and the option to check if you have any doubts?

The paragraph above 54.8 states the answer:
"Except for highway power supplies and street furniture, where PME conditions apply the main protective bonding conductor shall be selected in accordance with the neutral conductor of the supply and Table 54.8"

The centre can be fooked over by C&G if they know they are discussing the database questions with their candidates during or after an exam :O

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[SgtTrojan]

How do inspectors know that a certain size of conductor is missing from service pipework? Do they phone up the supply undertaking to check before they say, "you need a 10mm²"? Of course not.

We have the same version but the 2382 exam requires you to lift the information from the pages 95% of the time. Thinking about the questions usually gets one into trouble.

 

[JohnW2]

Absolutely but as you are only allowed one answer not 2 then D must be considered in every example.
B only occours if D gives result that DNO do not insiste on a bigger conductor.

In my time, I've been involved quite a bit in the writing, evaluation and marking of multiple choice exam questions - and the one we are talking about would generally not have been accepted. The wording of answer D may possibly have resulted from just sloppiness (or even incorrect knowledge) on the part of the person who wrote it - but if (as impled by dingbat) it was deliberate, this would generally be regarded as too close to being a 'trick question', which most examining bodies have a stated policy of not using. In particular, 'paraphrasing of the truth' is often specifically banned by the 'rules' of the examining body.

If, as one might hope in this day and age, a sophisticated (intelligent') marking system is used for this exam, then the bad wording of this question would not disadvantage candidates. If, as seems likely, the question was found to have poor discrimination (i.e. if answers B and D were both common, and the responses to this question showed no strong correlation to the overall performance of examinees in relation to all the questions), then the question would either be automatically 'ignored' or would be referred to an appropriate review committe to decide whether it should be ignored.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[SgtTrojan]

In the exam there is only one answer. C&G do not intend to get "electricians" to ponder over the "ins and outs", the "what ifs or maybes". You get two minutes per question. Is the info there? Yes it is. Bang (or should I say click?)

Regarding being drawn into an argument (which I somehow have lost) I see it more of a debate. My angle is that C&G, most of the time, allow the 2382 answers to be read directly from BS7671. BS7671 provide answer B that is written in the paragraph I stated above.

Yes, the inspector should contact the DNO, as the note states, but come on...
Why would the inspector have reason to believe that the DNO is going to say otherwise?

The debate is more of a 2391 type question that requires the higher level of understanding.

 

[JohnW2]

Regarding being drawn into an argument (which I somehow have lost) I see it more of a debate.

The main argument, introduced by dingbat (following a fairly general consensus) is regarding the wording of answer D. If it had said "DNO" (or, even better, "Local distributor", which is literally what the note to Table 15.8 says), rather than "supply undertaking", I think that most people here (including dingbat) would have answered D. Dingbat feels that 'suppy undertaking' (which is not the wording the regs use) is not the same as DNO - but it there as a 'trick' question.

However, I also take the point you initially made - that if one refers to Table 54.8, that table in turn contains the note about DNOs (so it can be argued that this also becomes part of a'B' answer) - which is an argument for answer B. That's why it's a very bad question. If the wording of D were changed so as to remove dingbat's point, there would be two answers, both of which could easily be argued to be correct.

Kind Regards, John

 

[SgtTrojan]

Agreed

 

[skenk]

Was the point dingbat was trying to make that D just actually doesn't make sense grammatically?

"D/ Determined after consultation with the supply undertaking."

Undertaking what? This question does not mention the DNO just 'supply' which means nothing.

The sentence does not make sense unless you add or change words:

"Determined after consultation with the supply authority undertaking the installation of a new connection."

or

"Determined after consultation with the DNO"

etc.



I agree it's a sh1t question

EDITops should have read JohnW2's last post!

 

[dingbat]

R

T

F

Q

You are all talking nonsense when you try and rewrite the incorrect answer that you have already decided you want to pick, so that it somehow fits the question.

It is really very simple indeed and only Sgt Trojan appears to understand this.

(No fricking wonder electricians can't understand the regulations - they can't read them in the first place. )

 

[JohnW2]

Was the point dingbat was trying to make that D just actually doesn't make sense grammatically?
"D/ Determined after consultation with the supply undertaking."
Undertaking what? This question does not mention the DNO just 'supply' which means nothing.
The sentence does not make sense unless you add or change words:
"Determined after consultation with the supply authority undertaking the installation of a new connection."

No, I don't think dingbat meant to suggest that there was anything gramatically wrong with the wording - since there isn't. "Undertaking" can be a noun as well as part of the verb 'to undertake' - and has the meaning of 'a business' - as in "a commercial undertaking". Hence "an [electricity] supply undertaking" would be perfectly grammatically acceptable, with a meaning that you and I would interpret as 'DNO'.

As I understand it, dingbat's point (which many might feel was over-pedantic) is that the question used the phrase "a supply undertaking", rather than "Local distributor" (which is the precise wording used in the Table 54.8 note) - and therefore that the statemnt of answer D was technically incorrect in terms of the exact words used in the regs.

or
"Determined after consultation with the DNO"

Well, if dingbat were being consistent in his approach (which doesn't appear to be the case), he would also have said the same thing (i.e. that Answer D was 'wrong') if answer D had referred to "DNO" - since (just like "supply undertaking") that is not the precise wording used in the regs.

Kind Regards, John.

 

[skenk]

You are all talking nonsense when you try and rewrite the incorrect answer that you have already decided you want to pick, so that is somehow fits the question.

I put those two examples as examples of how people might INCORRECTLY read the answer, and not as how i read or interpreted it, which was, as a line of nonsense.

(No fricking wonder electricians can't understand the regulations - they can't read them in the first place. )

Its a (not very good) exam question, not the regs.

I see your point and agree, the question is about regs in '7671, '7671 says 'B' is the answer. But there is also a note in that same book which says something different so I can understand why people are disputing it, it only seems to be you that can't.

Without looking up the book I picked 'B' before scrolling down, but I couldn't have told you at that moment what the finer points of the relevant regs were.

I don't think dingbat meant to suggest that there was anything gramatically wrong with the wording - since there isn't. "Undertaking" can be a noun as well as part of the verb 'to undertake' - and has the meaning of 'a business' - as in "a commercial undertaking". Hence "an [electricity] supply undertaking" would be perfectly grammatically acceptable, with a meaning that you and I would interpret as 'DNO'.

We might, but the word should be 'supplier' not supply. '. . . after consultation with the supply undertaking' DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, in ANY sentence that I can think of, yes, it's late and i'm probably missing something obvious so please do enlighten me otherwise.

As I understand it, dingbat's point (which many might feel was over-pedantic) is that the question used the phrase "a supply undertaking", rather than "Local distributor" (which is the precise wording used in the Table 54.8 note) - and therefore that the statemnt of answer D was technically incorrect in terms of the exact words used in the regs.

No I think his point was that the question is about regs in '7671, and not other factors which might affect those regs as they stand (such as notes).

If dingbat were being consistent in his approach (which doesn't appear to be the case), he would also have said the same thing (i.e. that Answer D was 'wrong') if answer D had referred to "DNO" - since (just like "supply undertaking") that is not the precise wording used in the regs.

You are right but I think it was someone else arguing that, holmslaw?

 

[SgtTrojan]

Meanwhile the assessment centre is glaring at you and tapping it's watch

 

[JohnW2]

I don't think dingbat meant to suggest that there was anything gramatically wrong with the wording - since there isn't. "Undertaking" can be a noun as well as part of the verb 'to undertake' - and has the meaning of 'a business' - as in "a commercial undertaking". Hence "an [electricity] supply undertaking" would be perfectly grammatically acceptable, with a meaning that you and I would interpret as 'DNO'.

We might, but the word should be 'supplier' not supply.

No, "a supplier undertaking" would be grammatically incorrect.

'. . . after consultation with the supply undertaking' DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, in ANY sentence that I can think of, yes, it's late and i'm probably missing something obvious so please do enlighten me otherwise.

It's quite unusual, and pretty 'old-fashioned', language (probably most often seen in legal circles these days), but it is correct, and does actually make sense (to those 'sad' or old enough to be familiar with such unusual language ). For example, "an import undertaking" (not 'an importer undertaking') would mean a business engaged in import. One way in which the word is still quite often used as a noun in everyday language in such contexts as "re-wiring the whole building was a major undertaking".

As I understand it, dingbat's point (which many might feel was over-pedantic) is that the question used the phrase "a supply undertaking", rather than "Local distributor" (which is the precise wording used in the Table 54.8 note) - and therefore that the statemnt of answer D was technically incorrect in terms of the exact words used in the regs.

No I think his point was that the question is about regs in '7671, and not other factors which might affect those regs as they stand (such as notes).

I'm sure he will correct me if necessary, but I think your 'No' is probably incorrect. True, he said that the question is 'about BS7671', but I took his point to be that only answers which corresponded exactly with the words used in BS7671 would be considered correct; maybe I misinterpreted him. He seemed to be agreeing that 'consult the DNO' would be a correct answer, but that Answer D (or any other answer) did not mention 'DNO' (which he seemed to be implying is what the note in BS7671 says, even though it doesn't) - only 'supply undertaking'. He wrote:

The incorrect wording of answer d) when compared to the note to table 54.8 is the clue that this answer is the deliberate detractor. You're talking about consulting the DNO yet no such answer is offered up.

If dingbat were being consistent in his approach (which doesn't appear to be the case), he would also have said the same thing (i.e. that Answer D was 'wrong') if answer D had referred to "DNO" - since (just like "supply undertaking") that is not the precise wording used in the regs.

You are right but I think it was someone else arguing that, holmslaw?

As above .... the quote above comes from dingbat's first post in this thread.

Whatever, I think that everyone but dingbat agrees that it was a badly worded question. The mere existence of this complicated debate about grammar etc. (which is going to nothing to help my reputation in the eyes of some members of this forum!!) is surely enough to confirm that?!

Kind Regards, John