[CAUT] CAUT credential vs. academic program?

[Richard Brekne]

Ah, a post what puts a finger closer to the core of the present tangent 
to this debate.  It has been amazing to see how so many have dodged 
around the more holistic pictures here to bang through individual points 
which regardless of their validity or not are rather meaningless in 
themselves.  We do need to keep it friendly tho .. :)

The thing is... everyone knows certifications are no guarantee of 
brilliance, and everyone knows a formal education is not the only way to 
knowledge and skill. These facts in no way however can be turned upside 
down and inside out to mean that certifications and formal schooling are 
of no or little value.

The fact is that certifications are valuable tools for evaluations 
purposes and they do provide goals or milestones to pursue.  They are 
not mandatory and do not represent a threat to anyone.  The fact is that 
formal education is a valuable tool for learning and gaining a basic 
knowledge base for future experience.

It is also true both have their weaknesses, both can be abused, neither 
are a guarantee of anything in the end.  Nor is 35 years of "experience 
working in the branch" a guarantee of any quality level.  You can say 
the same about anything really.  These cannot be reduced to black and 
whites argumentations. 

I say again.  Any CAUT certification worth its salt will have to be very 
demanding.  It should be, IMO, directed squarely at persons wishing to 
present themselves as capable of heading up a Department of Piano 
Technology at a large and demanding university.   If formed and used 
wisely such a certification can be a very useful tool in helping to 
attain the stated goals of improving salaries, respect for our field, 
and a greater understanding of just what it is we do and how important a 
role we play in a successful training program.

I guarenfriggentee you that if such a certification existed, and if 
schools and universities started looking people holding them and were 
willing to up the ante to get them on their team... a bunch of those 
against would start pursuing the thing quite quickly... and most of the 
rest would quite happily find themselves job working as an assistant to 
such a person.... quite likely at a higher wage and benefits level then 
then have today.

Cheers
RicB


    This is just another variation on the "nature vs. nurture" debate
    that only the most simple-minded take an extreme position on. The
    world is full of very talented "musical" hamburger flippers, taxi
    drivers, hospital orderlies, bicycle messengers and - well - piano
    "tooners" who don't have the patience or the discipline or - frankly
    - the maturity to work their way through the formal training and the
    discipline that would give them the musical vocabulary and the
    technique to fully develop their talent, who never let their talent
    come under the influence of other creative and well-trained talents
    so that it talent can bloom - because they think that their talent is
    enough. These are called "underachievers" and tend to throw stones at
    the educational system they apparently did not know how to take
    advantage of... Then, of course, there are the talentless "tools"
    without a talented bone in their body who dutifully plod their way
    through conservatories and music departments for no reason but -
    perhaps - to make the institutions financially sustainable. So what?
    Rarely does anyone make it in music without either formal training -
    or someone with formal training behind them fixing the screw-ups...
    It's possible, it happens - but very rarely - that someone can make
    it on raw talent alone.

    So stick to your guns, David

    Israel Stein

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20071107/110fe600/attachment.html