[CAUT] NASM Standards

[Fred Sturm]

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
    The NASM standards manual, which is in the process of being reviewed,
says the following about pianos:

I. Basic Criteria for membership
 10. The institution shall have facilities and equipment adequate to the
needs of its educational program.
=20
P 57
F. Facilities, Equipment, and Safety
-----
Equipment adequate for the work of the music unit shall be provided as
appropriate to the mission, goals, and objectives, and to the size and scop=
e
of the music unit. Equipment includes grand pianos; upright pianos; pipe
and/or electronic organs; electronic instruments and equipment; recording
equipment; audio and video playback equipment for libraries, listening
rooms, and classrooms; orchestral and band instruments; computers; supplies=
;
and any necessary audio-visual aids.
=20
Facilities and equipment shall be adequate to support faculty needs, all
curricular offerings and all students enrolled in them, and be appropriatel=
y
specialized for advanced work.
=20
Budget provisions shall be made for adequate maintenance of the physical
plant and equipment. Acoustical treatments appropriate to music facilities
shall be provided. Music units with goals and objectives that require
constant updating of equipment must demonstrate their capacity to remain
technologically current.


    Pretty slim on the piano front. But the last sentence quoted above
seemed to me to be an opening. Why couldn=B9t pianos have a similar sentence
or two, with a =B3must=B2 statement. So I came up with the following:

    Pianos must be maintained at a level consistent with artistic needs,
including tuning, regulation, voicing, reconditioning, and rebuilding and/o=
r
replacement as needed. Music units should demonstrate that they have
competently trained staff (whether employee or contract) to maintain their
pianos at an adequate level, and that they have in place a plan for regular=
,
on-going replacement and maintenance of their piano inventory.
=20

    I thought we should provide a supporting argument, and take the
opportunity to communicate additional ideas, so I wrote the following
accompanying statement:

            The piano plays a vital role in virtually every music program,
and the quality and condition of pianos affects nearly all faculty and
students on a daily basis. Thus, we believe that the piano merits specific
treatment in the Standards Manual.
            In addition to proposing this addition to the language of the
Standards Manual, we would like to offer our assistance in the accreditatio=
n
process. For purposes of self-study, we would like to suggest establishing
guidelines to assist in evaluating a piano maintenance program. A very brie=
f
but effective guided process would be a good place to start:
1)   The unit=B9s lead piano technician should be consulted in the process of
preparing a report.
2)   An inventory should be prepared, listing pianos by make, model/size,
serial number/age, and use. Use should be categorized, at a minimum, as
a.    Performance
b.    Classroom
c.    Piano faculty studio
d.    Other performance faculty studio
e.    Other faculty studio
f.     Piano major practice room
g.    Other practice room
3)   Each piano should be rated as to its condition, and as to whether it i=
s
of appropriate size and quality for its use. Replacement, rebuilding, and
major service needs should be identified.
4)   The unit should prepare a report indicating what pianos were purchased=
,
rebuilt, or remanufactured within the past ten years, and should outline
plans for the upcoming ten years, including budget and source of funds.
5)   A description should be developed outlining the current on-going
maintenance program. Questions to be answered should include, at a minimum:
What is done on a regular basis to the pianos in the inventory in addition
to tuning and emergency repair? How much total time is allocated per piano
for tuning each year? How much time is allocated per piano for additional
work?
6)   The qualifications and experience of the piano technician(s) should be
described.
=20
      The CAUT committee of the PTG would be willing to work with NASM in
developing a program whereby a piano technician with extensive college and
university experience might form a part of the on-site evaluation team, in
complex situations where that seems to be warranted. We would also voluntee=
r
to develop a process whereby we might aid in examining the portion of the
written self-evaluation dealing with pianos, offering suggestions as to
whether programs are adequate, realistic, and how they might be improved. I=
n
general, all programs should be able to show that they have planned for
regular replacement of instruments, for rebuilding where that is feasible
and cost-effective, and for maintaining instruments at a high performance
level =AD particularly performance, piano faculty studio, and piano major
practice room instruments. And they should be staffed (whether on an
employee or contract basis) with an adequately trained technician. At a
minimum, we would recommend that any piano technician in higher education
should be a Registered Piano Technician member of the Piano Technicians
Guild, which means that he or she has passed a series of written, technical
and tuning exams demonstrating a basic level of competence. We (the College
and University Technicians Committee) are in the process of developing a
means by which appropriate additional training can be identified and
quantified.
      We have developed a document, Guidelines for Effective Institutional
Piano Maintenance, which we believe can be very helpful to institutions in
designing a piano maintenance program, and would be a useful resource in
self-study and evaluation as well. It is available in pdf format at
www.ptg.org/caut <http://www.ptg.org/caut> , and in printed format from
www.ptg.org.=20


    I would welcome input on this. I think we have an opportunity we cannot
afford to pass up, and we need to act quickly, as July 8 is the stated
deadline for submissions.
Regards,
Fred Sturm
University of New Mexico



---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/af/85/f9/6c/attachment.htm

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