Guidelines addendum

[Allan L. Gilreath, RPT]

Bill and the list,

I like to see so many good thoughts coming forth in this discussion.
Inclusion of the contract techs (like myself) would be crucial in getting a
good picture of the actual state of affairs.

I'm very interested in the possibilities of expanding the CAUT educational
offerings and certainly appreciate any and all input that we can receive in
making the Institute more and more suited to our needs.  This looks like a
great means of expanding our educational offerings.

Allan
Allan L. Gilreath, RPT
Assistant Director - TEAM2001
July 11-15, 2001 - Reno, NV
agilreath@mindspring.com
http://www.ptg.org/conv.htm
Director: Laura Olsen, RPT
Assistant Directors: Allan Gilreath, RPT - Gary Neie, RPT - Dale Probst, RPT

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-caut@ptg.org [mailto:owner-caut@ptg.org]On Behalf Of
Bdshull@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2001 6:28 PM
To: caut@ptg.org
Subject: Re: Guidelines addendum


Fred, Michael:

I think gathering data on school piano service programs is at least as
important, if not more so, than the actual revision of the guidelines;
indeed, any guidelines revision could come from a discussion of this data.
The way to get NAMM's attention may be to take a snapshot of ALL schools,
including the contract-serviced schools (which are in the majority).

There are several ways of gathering data, each useful.  1.  The annual PTG
membership information sheet could include a supplemental sheet for CAUTs
making surveying possible (and including some tabulatable data with the
suppl. sheet);  2.  the aforementioned collection of schools on the 'net
could be surveyed;  3.  Official lists could be reasonably bought and used
for surveys:  the actual NAMM and College Music Society school lists could
be
surveyed.   In these different ways of gathering data, two types of data are
considered :  1.  actual databases of technicians/schools of music/piano
service programs, and 2.  statistical/survey data taken from samplings of
lists.

The easiest and cheapest way to get data from ourselves is through the
information form which is sent by the home office and returned by members
with their dues.  I recommend that this coming year's form include a
separate
form for CAUT techs, including contract techs.  Enough information should be
requested so that a database could be up and running.  If this includes
contract techs, an automatic database of employed and contract techs will be
available (this might triple or even square the size of the CAUT list).  If
email addresses are included, an email survey could be conducted each year.
Obviously this includes only music school techs who are members of the PTG.
Beyond the stated data-gathering goal, it is at least as valuable for CAUT
contract techs to "declare themselves."  Many contract techs may not
consider
themselves CAUTs, but need much the same specialization of training,
resources and colleagues which employed techs have;  returning this
supplemental information sheet could be first step towards that identity.

The PTG home office might cooperate in a survey using CMS- or NAMM-provided
lists.  I have talked with Dan Hall about this (and with Taylor a little
more
generally) and if the CAUTCOM wanted to request this we might receive home
office support.  A remarkable amount of data could be gathered with
incredible potential to help shape the future of piano service programs and
piano inventories.

Tangential to this discussion, but in my mind equally important:  I have
also
recommended that we begin to establish and meet curriculum objectives for
day-long CAUT annual events which provide all of us CAUTs with a baseline of
specialized training.  Certainly the structuring and specialization of
Annual
Institute CAUT curriculum would enhance our position with NAMM, etc.

Bill Shull, RPT
University of Redlands, La Sierra University







In a message dated 3/15/01 10:53:11 AM Pacific Standard Time,


Michael.Jorgensen@cmich.edu writes:

<< Fred Sturm wrote:

 > . The idea is to create peer pressure,

 Hi Fred,
     It is excellent what you are doing.  CAUT could have a database/file on
every
 music institution publicly available on the web.  Updated a minimum of
annually it
 would contain all of the information concerning a schools inventory and
 maintenance program, (how often pianos are tuned, staffing ratios, etc.).
We
 could all study each other for personal evaluation and inventory
comparison.
 More
 seriously, we could harness the real power of the web, by rating
institutions.
 Most schools take ratings very seriously like the US News and World Report
 Rankings and National Association of Schools of Music evaluations. I'm sure
these
 entities would be interested in CAUT reports also.  It won't surprise me at
all to
 learn of current top rated institutions harboring shameful conditions in
practice
 rooms.
       We also need to encourage schools to improve Staff technician
compensation
 to reflect the true value of technicians and thus encourage productivity.
I'm not
 sure how we can communicate that though.
 -Mike
  >>