[CAUT] CAUT credential vs. academic program?

[David Love]

Unfortunately, many CAUT techs are caught between what they feel needs to be
done (ideal outcomes) and what the university is willing or able to pay for.
Those two things are often miles apart and assessing the tech in that
context may not be quite fair.  

David Love
davidlovepianos at comcast.net 
www.davidlovepianos.com

-----Original Message-----
From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Alan
McCoy
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 12:40 PM
To: College and University Technicians <caut at ptg.org>
Subject: Re: [CAUT] CAUT credential vs. academic program?

I haven't been following this thread closely at all, except to see that it
has generated a lot of heat and comment.

FWIW, I think the best, though certainly not the cheapest nor the most
practical, way to measure or evaluate a CAUT for a credential is an on-site
"inspection" like a NASM visit. What better way to evaluate someone than to
see, feel and hear their body of work? And to see the context within which
they work - the budget, the number and quality of instruments, the tools and
workspace, the details of the contract or employment they work under.

Neither testing nor class attendance come close as evaluative tools.

My 2c worth.

Alan




> From: Fred S Sturm <fssturm at unm.edu>
> Reply-To: "College and University Technicians <caut at ptg.org>"
<caut at ptg.org>
> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:51:27 -0700
> To: "College and University Technicians <caut at ptg.org>" <caut at ptg.org>
> Subject: Re: [CAUT] CAUT credential vs. academic program?
> 
> On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 06:22:03 -0600
>   Ron Nossaman <rnossaman at cox.net> wrote:
>> The notion that nothing can be
>> learned without someone teaching it to you is nonsense.
>> Ron N
> 
>      Absolutely correct. In fact, one can say that real
> learning only happens when the person learning takes
> responsibility. And much if not most of what we learn is
> done on our own without direction from anyone else (we
> might have been given initial direction, but then we work
> it out for ourselves, in our own way. In a music lesson,
> we are given direction, then expected to "practice,
> practice" - which is where we really learn it. If we learn
> it). The best "teachers" are those who inspire their
> learners to
> become self-motivated learners. The best learners are
> those who question what their "teachers" say, and try to
> come to their own understanding.
>       Where does this thread have a practical application
> to the issue at hand, the potential creation of a caut
> credential? One way has to do with how piano technicians
> receive their training. A small proportion attend a
> formal, full-time training program like North Bennett.
> Most of us "pick up some here, some there," relying on
> formal or informal mentorships, factory-run intensive
> programs (usually week long), classes at regional or
> national institutes, reading the PTJ, books, listservs,
> etc. IOW, it is very difficult to measure what training
> most of us have had. Most of us probably consider
> ourselves "largely self-taught," however accurate or
> inaccurate that statement is on close examination.
>      If this credential is to become a reality, we need to
> measure skill and knowledge in some way, rather than
> focusing on training. To get a handle on what we might
> want to measure, we can imagine an average piano
> technician with a background mostly in the area of home
> service, as in semi-regular tuning, a bit of regulation,
> necessary repairs for the most part. This, let us say,
> represents the level of skill and knowledge tested for in
> the RPT exams (and let's not get bogged down in examining
> those exams in detail. Too much of a distraction from the
> task at hand). Throw that person into a caut context. What
> additional chops and knowledge are needed?
>       There are certainly some practical, mechanical
> skills and levels of skill that need to be addressed.
> Tuning well enough to get a check for a home tuning is
> different from tuning well enough for a professional
> musician and musical audience, and this is particularly
> noticeable in the concert situation. Especially in the
> clarity and stability of unisons. Regulating well enough
> to make the instrument work for most people is different
> from the precision and "subtlety" needed in the
> professional context. Not to mention voicing. There are a
> lot of procedures that are far more common in a caut
> context than in most others, like keybushing, tail
> scuffing, knuckle brushing, centerpinning to fine
> tolerances.
>      And then there are organizational skills: "You have
> 500 hours per year to take care of 50 pianos. Go do it."
> Hmmm, how to get started? How to know if 10 hours per
> piano per year is enough? Where to begin?
>      It would be lovely to have an actual educational
> program for cauts, full time for at least a few months. We
> are more likely to have to rely on classes at national
> institutes (moving out as possible to regionals), and
> factory programs like the one Steinway does at Oberlin,
> for the foreseeable future. I can certainly see the value
> in working towards regular caut intensive programs, where
> we bring cauts to various universities across the country
> from year to year to do a few days of hands on. It would
> take a lot of work to organize and prepare, and costs
> would certainly be an issue. I don't think it would be
> like Ed Foote's assessment of the financial rewards of
> having attended North Bennett: a clear financial plus for
> the attendee.
>       In many ways, what we have before us is "an
> impossible task." Whatever we come up with will not be
> "ideal." Still, I firmly believe that we can come up with
> something meaningful and useful.
> Regards,
> Fred Sturm
> University of New Mexico