Gnashing over"No"

[Richard Brekne]

Grin... I always enjoy Eds comments.. even when he's all
over me... comments intertwined below.

A440A@AOL.COM wrote:
> 
> As Jed Clampett would say, "Hooo Dawg!!"
>     In response to the suggestion of class restriction or division,  a small
> chorus of opposition arises.  Let's look at what we got....
> 
>    Richard writes:
> >  For the life of me I cant see how the interests of the PTG in this
> matter could possibly be better (or more fairly) served then
> they are now. If it aint broke... dont fix it.<<
> 
>     I have seen a man with a car that smokes, gets half the milage it should,
> and leaks everywhere but the owner tells me that it needs nothing, cause it
> ain't broke......"Broke or not broke" is an overly simplistic way of looking
> at anything.

So the car was broke... it needed fixing. :) I cant see the
same applies to the Convention.


>      I am suggesting ways to seek improvement.  If one believes that the
> convention's organization is ideal, then of course, they will seek no change.
>  I, on the other hand, know that I have left more than several "advanced"
> classes feeling like I wasted my time in them because the instructor got
> bogged down with basic questions and never finished his lesson plan.  In
> this, I am not alone.  I believe we should investigate things that may
> improve the current state of affairs.


This is quite fair. You are pointing to the lack of teaching
skills many of our instructors have. And why shouldn't this
be expected ? Becoming an effective teacher is a skill, and
a hard won one at that, all its own. Its a real problem and
I don't see how much more the PTG can do to address it then
they do already. But I am willing to listen to suggestions.
I certainly don't see that paying instructors can solve that
problem adequately, let alone understand that that approach
will not create more problems then it will solve.


>     We should also remember that the attendees at the Convention represent a
> small percentage of the Guild, and the Guild membership, itself, is a small
> percentage of  people that are working on pianos.  Why is this so?  Why do 4
> out of 5 Guild members not go to the convention?   I submit this as reason to
> continully investigate what can improve the attraction.

Certainly we need to investigate what we can do to attract
more participants, for that matter on all levels of PTG
endeavor.

> 
> RicB again:
> >To what end should we move towards more elitist and more non-inclusive
> classes ?
> 
>     My original post suggested a dual considerationl; a restriction of
> certain classes and the addition of basic versions of these classes.  The
> idea is to present teachers, (who are usually not professional teachers) with
> a more defined target.  Is there any university or college that doesn't
> require prerequisites for certain advanced courses?  No, of course not.
> Efficiency in teaching demands some grouping of skill levels within the
> classroom.  I am casting about for increased efficiency and the addtion of
> several RPT-only classes needn't cause such alarm over "elitist" directions.
> Colleges don't let freshmen attend post-graduate courses, for good reason.

Ed... we are not a university, and our "students" have
nothing in common thus with university students. We have no
adequate rating system for which to make any such divisions.
We have enough problems already with associates feeling
snubbed, ETD tuners feeling looked down on, RPT's feeling
they are not given enough due credit and privileges and all
the rest. In principal I can empathize with your position...
but I cant see its a doable without a major overhaul of the
whole system.

> 
>>An instructors hotel expenses should be covered, and
>> then the travel expenses, and then of course why should
>> exhibitors really not get the same treatment... what real
>> benefit is it for them to pander up to this small group of
>> semi-professionals any ways ???
> 
> Who are you are calling "semi-professionals".  The majority of RPT's I
> know are full time piano people.
> Exhibitors are there to advertise and sell their products, why pay them to
> do that?  The logic of that question totally escapes me.


Full time work does not a professional make.... not by a
long shot. And it matters not whether you or I agree with
that statement or not, (because I agree in fact very much
with you on that point me thinks) What matters is how we are
viewed from the outside. I don't see that we as a profession
demand or get anywhere near the respect we should. (See my
next post) Exhibitors can speak for themselves on why they
would feel deserving of a financial break for attending.
Give them a hint that they can get somewhere and I am sure
they will come up with some good reasons.  


> >  And why should Yamaha and Steinway, or anyone else bother showing up
> > and treating us all to these receptions..<
> 
>    See above.  The factories know that we are influential in sales.
> 

I wouldn't push that point very hard if I was the PTG.... no
no no no I would indeeeeed not. 

>> 
>>I suggest if anyone wants to get paid for their schooling
>> efforts, then they arrange a tour of localized seminars
>> around the country and see how much interest you can drum
>> up. 
>> There are more than a few of us doing just that. Chapters I have visited,
>> so far, all seem to feel like they got their money's worth.
> 

This is a good thing me thinks. And its the appropriate
venue for it. 

>
> Regards,
> Ed Foote RPT


Thanks muchly Ed.

Cheers !

RicB