[CAUT] NASM Standards

[Bdshull@aol.com]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
I completely agree, the more directed energy we put into this the better.   
July 8....wow.  An incentive to get something done!

We should keep in mind that political realities tend to reduce our chances 
for anything we do to achieve official approval by NASM.  Of all the 
administrators I've talked with, they don't want another hurdle to jump through, and 
prefer standards to be kept vague.  

All the more reason for us to develop a well reasoned and comprehensive set 
of guidelines for NASM, which shows we've taken into consideration their own 
methods and philosophy for evaluation, as well as their approach to types and 
sizes of schools.

I'll never forget when one School of Music director told me that I saved his 
behind by having all the pianos in tune when NASM came by....the school really 
looked good....I couldn't help but think how the budget was so deplorable, 
and had any basic standard been used to measure the piano inventory and piano 
service program, the school wouldn't have looked horrific....

There's no doubt the Guidelines should be referred to, but a summary of 
standards should be simple, easy to grasp quickly, and reflect NASM's dual approach 
to evaluation, which, as I understand it, recognizes the type of school or 
program as the basis for evaluation, and also uses the school's self-evaluation. 
  This self-evaluation is extremely important, because it is quite 
subjective.  The school can find a way to make itself look quite good when we know the 
piano inventory condition and the service program is sinking.

Here also is a strong justification for the development of a CAUT credential. 
 If such a thing is in place, NASM could be looking to whether the school's 
lead tech has, or is earning, the credential.   The committee will have to work 
long and hard on this year if  we have "beta" volunteer program up and 
running for this coming convention, but it would be worth it.  Fred has worked hard 
on this at the convention, and I suspect he will have some things to say about 
it.

Bill Shull



  In a message dated 6/21/2005 11:03:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
jtanner@mozart.sc.edu writes:
On Tuesday, June 21, 2005, at 01:55 PM, Wolfley, Eric (wolfleel) wrote:

> I certainly think it would behoove us to look into this.
>
> Eric Wolfley, RPT
> Supervising Piano Technician
> College-Conservatory of Music
> University of Cincinnati
>

The language from the handbook describing pianos as Facilities, 
Equipment, and Safety is extremely vague, and leaves much to the 
imagination.  Some better descriptive guidelines would seem 
appropriate.  I doubt there would be a music faculty out there which 
would not appreciate some help from NASM to establish better standards 
in our area.

Jeff


Jeff Tanner, RPT
School Of Music
University of South Carolina

_______________________________________________
caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/00/e4/53/0a/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--