January 24 Through February 4—TUCSON, ARIZONA: Annual show
Welcome to the GemologyOnline.com Forum
A non-profit Forum for the exchange of gemological ideas
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 7:39 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:21 am 
Offline
New to the Forum or The Quiet Type

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:57 am
Posts: 6
Can someone tell me the difference between the old syllabus and the new one? And I am very interested to know what the new course offers me. Thank you! :D


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 1:49 pm 
Offline
Valued Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:29 am
Posts: 123
Location: London
Didn't really see the old one,if Pandora stumble across your post she may say more but as far as I've heard the new one has more pictures,is more "user friendly",has less material in comparison :cry: but thats the case with everything now...

_________________
Treasurion Gems & Jewellery

Gems & Jewellery Blog

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 7:57 am 
Offline
New to the Forum or The Quiet Type

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:57 am
Posts: 6
My father got the old syllabus, the textbook is quite dull without colours. But what I am more interested in is the coursework. Since the old syllabus doesn't have any coursework, I don't really know what really needs to be done if I take the new syllabus.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 4:50 am 
When was this old>new change supposed to have happened?

If it was the minor changes from around 2 years ago, yea I did the old course.

Practical exam was different in the 'new' version (two less stones), but that has been my only exposure to the changes, because I had a three-year gap between doing most of the FGA and doing that final exam.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:32 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 4:27 pm
Posts: 1750
There are a few changes. Less stones as kyriakin says, less questions to answer on written exams, some material removed, some material added, spectra are now blue on the left (as in GIA), some course work is done online, blah blah blah...oh it's in colour now.

Some say it's been dumbed down and is easier. Old guys say my "old" notes were dumbed down and easier. What difference does it make in the end? you do the course presented to you and if you pass then you're an FGA


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 1:46 am 
Offline
New to the Forum or The Quiet Type

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:57 am
Posts: 6
Thank you very much for your info! That means it is easier to take the new course? I will be looking forward to it then!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:24 pm 
Offline
Valued Contributor

Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:55 pm
Posts: 179
Location: London, UK
Nope... not easier!

I have the old and new course notes.

The two cover the same ground, but some things have moved between Foundation and Diploma and vice-versa. The old notes were very academic looking with a couple of pages of photos and the odd line drawing - the new ones are in glorious technicolour, stacks of photos and diagrams but the content is basically the same.

Which you prefer is personal preference. I tend to like everything in boring old-school format - too many photos distract me - in the way that I would rather read a book than a magazine. Most people probably prefer the new version.

Assignments - 20% of your overall mark is for the online assignments (plus a project in the Diploma level). They are timed and cover a fair chunk of material for each one. It's mainly multichoice, or one or two word answers. Half the battle is realising that the computer has a nasty habit of marking things wrong that are actually right (don't worry it gets remarked by a human). You get 2 goes at each one as well.

Personally I thought the old 'assignments' at the end of each chapter were more useful - but they took forever to do and there were no marks for them or anything, it was just handy for revision.

Project is a 1500 word essay on one of a number of topics. The topics are fairly wide so you can pretty much do it on your pet interest one way or another. They like it to show a fair element of original research. Projects chosen in my group were things like: An opal mine in Australia that the student had visited, photographing inclusions, welo-opal, moonstone mines, 18th Century jewellery etc. It's easy enough to do.

It was a reason that I initially thought the new course had dumbed down - I started the old one as an ODL student then got pregnant, very ill and embroiled in a very messy courtcase, since my daughter was due a week before the exams and I was only a couple of months into studying I decided to start again studying on-site with the new course. After the first assignment I was really worried about what had happened, but that was dispelled over the next few months.

The changes to the exams (Diploma level)

Theory: 3 hours and 4/6 questions versus 3.5 hours and 5/6 questions. The extra question has been replaced by the assignments and project.

Practical: 3 hours - 6 x A, 2 x B, 3 x C and 10 x D. Fail is now 3 stones in section D rather than 4 stones.

Having just finished this year, I can say that we were all left reeling by the theory results - we all thought we'd aced it and yet very few people passed. I saw my tutors at IJL a few weeks ago and they were a bit suprised too as our class was reckoned to be better on the theory than most.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Mon Sep 26, 2011 6:01 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:42 pm
Posts: 2846
Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Pandora,
I had the same experience with being left reeling by my FGA results, as did several of my classmates last year. Literally 20% less than I felt that I had scored. I said a bit about it here: http://www.gemologyonline.com/Forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=14604

I personally think that part of it is that the Foundation exam is set up so that Question = Straightforward answer, while the Diploma exam expects Question = Massive information download of anything that may be relevant. Obviously, there is nothing wrong with either, but it didn't occur to me that the approach taken for the Diploma exam was different than that taken for the Foundation. I knew all of the information that was mentioned in my examiners report, I just didn't think that the questions were looking for such a large delta of info. I would guess that might be what your class ran into as well, did anyone get an examiners report for their results?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Tue Sep 27, 2011 7:31 pm 
Offline
Valued Contributor

Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:55 pm
Posts: 179
Location: London, UK
First of all, HUGE congratulations on your award - that is a fantastic achievement.

Secondly, I was also left somewhat stunned by my Theory result and I think the massive (in my mind) difference between the standard needed for the Foundation and that needed for the Diploma isn't immediately obvious despite being told endlessly that Foundation = What and Diploma = Why!

In the Foundation I scored mid-90's despite not having enough time to really complete either paper and getting one of the stone IDs wrong.

In both Diploma papers, I liked all the available questions so picked my 4 favourites, then I had 20 minutes at the end to go back and add and check things. I read around the subject a lot and so could add a fair amount of info that wasn't in the notes. I kept copies of the exam questions and then went through all the notes and deducted marks everywhere I could and I was still in the 90's from what I could make out on both papers.

I mean, if there are two marks up for grabs and you make 4 correct and salient points, you should have done enough to get the 2 marks you would think! I'm a big believer in 'exam theory' and so every single question I counted up the available marks and tried to make at least twice the number of points in each answer.

I think you are almost certainly right about the amount of information they want. For example there was a big spectrum question... 16 marks available, 8 stones and they wanted the spectrum and observations with x10 loupe only that would help ID the stone. I learn spectrums in word form (ie Ruby = fine lines in the blue, broad strong band in green-yellow-orange, fine lines in the red, strong emission line in red.) I have a feeling that they would have like that plus a drawing of the spectrum plus examples of several visual indicators to get the full 2 marks for each stone.

I got a B grade which puts me at under 80% so that is at least 10% lower than where I thought and I just can't see how I could have lost all those marks considering that there is no negative marking or cohort marking...

Other people in my group (and I think the tutor) have said they were a bit surprised that I didn't score higher - I had a 97.7% score on the coursework element to begin with.

I'm vaguely thinking of getting an examiner's report just for my own curiosity as to where I went wrong, but then I wonder if I will just start kicking myself over things and I'm better to spend the money on rocks instead! Also, quite frankly I'm just so thrilled to have actually passed the wretched thing that I almost don't care!

I have suggested a few changes that they could make to the in-house teaching - ie doing some timed sample questions in class with a discussion session afterwards looking at the examiners reports alongside. Whereas we had plenty of mock practicals, there were no mock theories and the online assignments are not (IMHO) of the same level of difficulty.

It was also a bit annoying that the examiners reports for the 2010 and the Jan 2011 exams weren't available to look at, plus the more recent ones haven't had the depth of detail that the older reports did.

With the Foundation I felt that anyone could pass as long as they spent enough time learning the notes and repeating them back. With the Diploma, I think it is quite possible to never actually pass the bugger!

Would you recommend getting a report, or will a nice new pet rock be less likely to disturb one's inner karma? And, I totally agree about an in-depth corundum or garnet or whatever course - I'm rather allergic to diamonds so the DGA isn't on my wish-list.

Anyway, I look forward to seeing you get your award at the Graduation Ceremony (I'll do lots of cheering and applause on behalf of GO members :D ) BTW, Are you going to the Conference? I'm doing the Sunday, but sadly can't get the childcare to do either the Royal Jewels tour or Gary's photography class...

ETA: I also did the condense, condense and then condense some more on the notes... I got the whole Foundation syllabus on a set of 40 revision cards in biggish handwriting!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 7:04 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:42 pm
Posts: 2846
Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
First, thanks for the congats! And congrats to you on your FGA!
If you're at Grad, introduce yourself to me during the cocktail bit afterwards. I should be with a couple of other GO members, it's always nice to put faces to names.

Re: Foundation marks and diploma expectations. You sound like me :D

From how I understand it, it's not so much a matter of deducting marks, it's a matter of not earning the marks. So as you say, if in the spectrum question, one is required to draw the spectrums for full marks, even if you describe them using the wavelength numbers, if there are no diagrams, you won't earn full marks. If they were wanting labelled diagrams of the observational points of what you see under a loupe, and you didn't draw that, you wouldn't have earned full marks even if you made a bullet list of them all. If they were looking for specific "talking points" on questions, and your 4 salient points didn't include them all, there would have been marks you didn't "earn". At least, that's how I understood the process after the fact, and applied that to the DGA exam. Does that makes any sense? Also, it's probably safe to say that some of the marks that you "earn" are related to showing how well you have integrated all of the information in the course as a whole.

eg: What colour is the sky on a cloudless day at noon?
Foundation = blue
Diploma= blue, how the atmosphere "filters" different wavelengths at different times of the day, how for gemmology purposes that blue sky is northern and why, what the Kelvin degree of that northern noon blue sky would be, a mention of the Fraunhaufer lines along with a diagram of the spectrum, a brief discussion on the effects of pollution on the colour of the sky, the fact that for people with certain types of colourblindness it won't be blue at all and the possibility that for certain animals who's eyes pick up a wider visible light spectrum than ours it won't be blue either.

But if they were expecting a mention of UV-A, UV-B and UV-C rays in there somewhere which I didn't mention, I wouldn't have "earned" whatever mark that would have been worth.

At any rate, that's how I approached the Diamond Diploma exam. As I said in a different post, it was an exercise of massive information download from brain to paper of anything that I thought might have some relevancy to the question at hand. I'm positive that had I taken the same approach to the FGA exam, my grade would have been much much higher.

I think that you can only request an examiner's report for your exam in the first three weeks after you receive your results, so I don't think you'd be able to get one now. Anyways, the point of the whole thing is that you got your FGA and that you have a firm grasp on what they taught. Having or not having had the right "strategy" for the exam isn't going to erase any of that from your brain, even if it is annoying as heck to not get what you were no doubt capable of. So, buying rocks sounds like a good plan :wink:

We actually did mock theory in the run up to our gemmology exams and feedback on our answers. That said, I don't know if the tutors are the ones who mark exams, because what was deemed as a good complete answer in the mock obviously wasn't in the real exam. It ended up being a bit misleading when I think of it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 2:51 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 4:27 pm
Posts: 1750
Quote:
quite frankly I'm just so thrilled to have actually passed the wretched thing that I almost don't care!


Thats the attitude :D

I also thought I would get an A for the theory paper but was afraid I'd blown the practical so it balanced out and I was so relieved that the whole thing was over and I'd passed that I was content.

I did the course by distance learning and never even knew that the answers on the diploma should be tackled any differently. I followed Africanuck through her "new" course notes and was sure she'd get an "A" I was also jealous of the in-class facilities (especially on the practical)...I'd have loved that kind of input. By comparison my own tutor marked assignment (old notes) seemed dull and unimaginative and because I got an "A" for all of them except one I thought I was going to sail the theory.

Still at the end of the day we can all see why the bloody FGA's feel so bloody proud to belong...it's not easy so it's a nice feeling just to pass

sidenote; Tim reckons FGA stands for f**king good answers...I don't think he's wrong...Glad you passed (AND YOU BART, STAND UP AND BE CONGRATULATED) Chuffed with julie for winning the geeks (sorry Deeks) prize :lol:

Best wishes to you all...enjoy the graduation...have a wee dram on me (All invoices to be sent to Bart)

Frank


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 4:37 pm 
Offline
Valued Contributor

Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:55 pm
Posts: 179
Location: London, UK
Your explanation of the probable answer they wanted makes sense - the questions are such that you definitely end up thinking 'How the **** was I supposed to know that THAT was what you wanted? :shock: '.

And I now know that I don't need to get the examiners report - I can go through and see what was wanted that I didn't think they wanted but did. And it explains the 'you can make 6 good points for 2 marks but if the point that we wanted isn't there then you will only get 1 mark' thing.

I'm also a natural essay-writer rather than the table/bullet pointer which the examiners tend to prefer I believe.

The tutors don't mark the exams - they don't even know the results until well after the candidates do, I filled mine in on who had got what at IJL which was a good 10 days after the results. My tutor said that they often disagreed with what the examiners wanted which is a little un-nerving!

I believe the examiners are a mix of gemmologists, geologists, physicists and random other qualified people. I think that we should all try and sign up for the role at some point in order to get our own back! :twisted:

Frank, I too was convinced I had failed the practical (there are novel like posts of anguish from me on GO following that ghastly afternoon) and so my overwhelming feeling was one of sheer relief!

Africanuck - I will definitely come and introduce myself after the ceremony, and will have a dram for you Frank! (And then prostrate myself at the feet of the ubergod/goddess who wins the Tully Medal :smt033 )


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Wed Sep 28, 2011 4:44 pm 
Offline
Valued Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:28 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Belgium
What? Invoice? :o DRINKS??? #-o I need my money for stooooones! :|

Thanks, bro! ;)

_________________
Can we become, or must we be?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Thu Sep 29, 2011 3:55 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 12:42 pm
Posts: 2846
Location: Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Bart FGA: drinks after the ceremony are free, you lucky thing ;). Besides, I'm kind of going on the golf theory that he/she who gets a hole in one buys the round :wink:

Frank FGA: :lol: for Tim's description of what FGA stands for! I'm still pretty chuffed too, my kids are starting to roll their eyes at my perma-grin. :D

Pandora FGA: Looking forward to meeting you.

Yay us! 8)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Old syllabus? New syllabus?
PostPosted: Sun Oct 09, 2011 7:37 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 3:42 pm
Posts: 4091
Location: the Netherlands
Yay on you indeed Bart, Pandora & Julie! =D>


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Gemology Style ported to phpBB3 by Christian Bullock