List, I'm stepping out on a limb here, but I'm following the idea of new testing to validate the CAUT position. I am not a CAUT technician, and it took me several attempts to pass the RPT exams. If I had not worked hard and swallowed my pride, I would not be an RPT today. Admitting and overcoming failure, therefore, is part of my recipe for success. For me, there are no shortcuts. Success is defined, in a large part, on failure. I have a deep-seated reservation about the idea of creating a new kind of tests. While I believe in testing whole-heartedly, I have serious doubts as to whether or not we, as an organization (be it CAUT or PTG), have the stomach to stand by the test results. In my limited 7 years in this business, I have seen enough training classes to get a feel for how many people take notes, study, or practice what they have seen and heard in classroom training. Unfortunately, I find myself being constantly disappointed. After several years in the military, and being 52 years old, I have been involved in a lot of training and testing there as well, and I saw the same thing happen in other professions; since people learn in different ways and at different speeds, there will always be a bell curve when it comes to ability and competency (e.g. passing scores and failing scores). Since I am surrounded by people where I work who don't know as much about our profession as I do, I find it easy to start believing that I am better at what I do than I really am. I am not, however, the epitome of excellence, and I recognize that we all rise to the level of our own incompetence. Are we, as an organization, willing to create objective testing that requires, be definition, that some of the takers will fail the test? If we don't create this kind of testing, the test will not be accurate reflections of our competency. If the RPT exams were easy, I would rather buy my own certificate at Office Max and pat myself on the backs... that's how much it would mean to me. If we can figure out how to give these kinds of good tests, I'm all for it, but if we we can't, I would rather keep learning as best I can... no matter how slow that is... with no tests to validate what I don't know. -John Parham, RPT Hickory, NC > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Professional Development > From: tnrwim at aol.com > Date: Sat, May 15, 2010 4:05 am > To: ed440 at mindspring.com, caut at ptg.org > > > In effect the Home Office would maintain transcript records showing > ontinuing professional learning. > > Ed > > The idea is good, but it would take additional personnel at the HO to enter the data from each seminar, maintain the transcripts, and send out requests when they come in. Are we ready to pay the additional dues to do that? And that's if some one at the seminar sends the information to the HO in the first place. An awful lot of hard feelings will happen when seminar directors don't send in the information to the HO in a timely manner. > > Wim > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ed440 <ed440 at mindspring.com> > To: caut <caut at ptg.org> > Sent: Fri, May 14, 2010 9:43 pm > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Professional Development > > > I have felt that an approach like this could be used to develop "endorsements" > n a range of topics in a "build your own curriculum" fashion. Continuing > rofessional education credits for RPTs, similar to what doctors do. Nowadays > octors can study and take some of their continuing education classes on line. > I would add that I feel there should be some kind of exam at the end of the > lass, or shortly thereafter, to demonstrate that the student really did learn > omething. In effect the Home Office would maintain transcript records showing > ontinuing professional learning. One of the functions of PTG would be to > evelop competency or knowledge exams on a range of continuing education topics. > I also feel exams can be used to evaluate the success of classes. Lecture > lasses are nice, but who knows how effective they are? If students can pass an > xam after my class, then I know I have been a successful teacher. Hands-on > lasses can have a task goal to show what has been learned. > Ed Sutton > > ----Original Message----- > From: "Ward & Probst, Inc" <wardprobst at wardprobst.com> > Sent: May 14, 2010 11:24 PM > To: caut at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Professional Development > > Richard, > > Sorry, no intent to offend, I like the idea. Perhaps certificates passed out > at the end of class would solve the sign off issue that the Passport program > had. By the way, I didn't view the Passport program as a failure in in > concept, just in execution. It's one thing to have an idea, it's a whole > other ball game to get 4,000 PTG members to go along with it, DAMHIK. > Best, > DP > > -----Original Message----- > From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of > rwest1 at unl.edu > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 10:10 PM > To: caut at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Professional Development > > > Dale, > > I don't particularly like the comparison to the Passport to Excellence since > that program was such a failure. I was thinking more along the lines of > what mechanics get when they attend specialized training classes. They > receive a "certificate" that is suitable for framing. I think we could > learn from the problems with the passport experience but do a more > professional job of providing seminar attendees something concrete to prove > that they acted on the worthy pursuit of continuing education. Like many > ideas, the devil would be in the details and implementing a proof of > purchase program would be tricky. > > Richard West > > > On May 14, 2010, at 4:07 PM, Ward & Probst, Inc wrote: > > > RW, > Sounds similar to the Passport to Excellence program of a few years ago. As > I recall, it was difficult for those who participated to get instructors to > sign off on their attendance. The instructors would be tied up answering > questions and signing off for some time after classes basically creating a > traffic jam. Perhaps present day technology might help in that regard. It > would certainly be a step in the right direction particularly if we > developed a resume template that would display the credentials in a > professional manner. It is more or less what I was hoping to do with the > endorsements initially- recognize those who devote their time, talent and > treasure to the pursuit of excellence. > DP > > Dale Probst, RPT > Registered Piano Technician > Midwestern State University > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of > rwest1 at unl.edu > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 3:24 PM > To: caut at ptg.org > Subject: Re: [CAUT] CAUT Endorsement Requirements Misperception - > wasPreaching to the Choir > > > Why couldn't CAUT develop resume builders, i.e., suggested classes and > certificates stating that a person attended those classes. For example, > attending Steinway seminars should be CAUT suggested classes. as well as > Yamaha Little Red School House. The same with Diskavier and PianoDisk > seminars. Closer to home, every national or regional seminar should grant > proof of attendance to regional classes or annual convention classes for > those that want such proof. The certificate could list the classes that the > person attended. Such pieces of paper would not only be good for those > wanting to get a job at a university, but it would be good for those who > already has a position and is wanting to prove to the institution that the > technician was participating in professional classes. > > Richard West > > On May 14, 2010, at 3:01 PM, Chris Solliday wrote: > > > > Bill, > Well if it is SO easy, then just drop the RPT requirement and you will find > a great deal more support. The RPT franchise can be marketed to institutions > on its own merit. Of course there will be a few of your supporters who will > disagree, but we must look for a way for the whole organization to > participate in additional certifications. In fact just to get the record > straight all additional certifications should be open to ALL PTG members. > Then it IS as simple as taking some courses and some written tests. (It was > Kent Swafford who said, "I thought this would be simpler." Or words to that > ...) This gives us the universality and flexibility to distinguish those in > other area of expertise who will not be tuners as well. And it would allow > us to include those very well trained (factory and other) CAUTs who are not > RPTs but might want to become so if not forced to. > > In the face of self interest and political reality please ask yourself why > the RPTs who will be voting in council would vote to make a few of their > rank RPTs plus, or uber techs, or whatever you want to call it when you > build only on the RPT franchise. Franchise ownership is a separate issue. > And a much bigger prize. > > Why would an RPT who does not do much or no institutional work agree to > giving an RPT a larger status than he or she has? Drop the RPT component and > the endorsement makes sense with a few tweaks. The elephant in the room is , > the CAUT endorsement should be open to all, as we have been suggesting to > you for quite some time. Continuing to put your head in the sand and > continuing to recite what you hope might come true over and over is probably > not going to work. > > I don't think btw that Jeff Tanner is unfamiliar with the proposal as you > would digress. You should have been listening to what he and others have > been saying on this issue for years, then maybe you would be familiar with > what is reasonable and possible within the PTG structure. > > It always amazes me when piano technicians don't listen. > Chris Solliday > > From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of > Bdshull at aol.com > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 2:37 AM > To: caut at ptg.org > Subject: [CAUT] CAUT Endorsement Requirements Misperception - was Preaching > to the Choir > Hi, Jeff, > > Your last few posts lead me to think you are not familiar with the CAUT > Endorsement proposal requirements, and it might be that others have this > same misperception too. It would be easy, if one is to just read > Regulations and Codes Article IV, to come to the conclusion that the CAUT > Endorsement might only be attained by attending the CAUT Academy courses and > taking the 4 written tests. However, this is a mis-read of the proposal. > The core of the proposal is in bylaws. If you don't have the May supplement > you may go to the PTG Page members area, and follow the links - resources, > forms and documents, Council 2010, Organizational/LRP: > > http://www.ptg.org/members/docs/2010/2010_Council_Agenda_Section_4-Organizat > ional-LRP.pdf > > The only requirements in order to obtain this endorsement are that one be a > Registered Piano Technician, and that one pass a written test on > CAUT-related subjects. The CAUT Endorsement is designed like a > certification, similar to the RPT; preparation for it is not proscribed > but a CAUT Academy is offered with comprehensive curriculum. This is > similar to the RPT itself, where a variety of paths or combination thereof > can lead to the CAUT Endorsement - trade schools, apprenticeships, the Randy > Potter course, the PACE lessons. > > A CAUT Academy curriculum will be developed and offered, and each segment > will be followed by written tests. This road to the CAUT Endorsement will > be an incredible opportunity to master the knowledge and skills needed for > college and university work. However, there are no proscribed courses to > obtain the CAUT Endorsement in this proposal. > > I would expect that all of the excellent training programs - the Theodore > Steinway Seminars, the Little Red Schoolhouse, etc, that you've referred to > could be of use in preparing for the CAUT Endorsement, as they address many > of the skills required in the college and university setting. These > courses are limited in their applicant pool, while the PTG does not, and can > not place anti-competitive restrictions on its certifications. Further, > the CAUT Academy curriculum would be CAUT-comprehensive in nature, unlike > anything else available. > > I would also expect that the CAUT Academy, specifically tailored to the > college setting - and not manufacturer-specific - would be an ideal > preparation for College and University work, as it will be taught by leading > technicians in the field. > > The time may come when the PTG community would approve of additional testing > beyond a written test, but the development of skills tests is a large > project. Testing must meet a number of standards, and a process of > beta-testing would also be required. Needless to say this has been the > subject of considerable discussion in the committee, as well as in > conversations with the board and bylaws. It was felt that this approach to > CAUT Endorsement requirements would not be onerous or unachievable by > qualified members (RPTs). > > The CAUT Endorsement testing would also provide the candidate with an > assessment of areas needing further training or education. But there are > only these two requirements - RPT status and the passing of a written test. > > I hope that you might see that this might satisfy your concerns. Some have > considered this a "watered-down" and ineffective proposal, but your > arguments actually make the case for the proposal as it is presented, not > onerous, not complex, not unattainable, but still a reflection of a > commitment to a certain knowledge base, as well as a commitment to continued > growth and participation in the CAUT community. > > The curriculum component of this endorsement is voluntary. Even if the > applicant doesn't attend the CAUT Academy, the curriculum is important in > that it defines the skills and knowledge base needed for CAUT piano service, > and should be an excellent source of CAUT-specific training and education. > Anyone who hasn't studied the proposal should look over the curriculum ; > they will see the wide range of areas the CAUT technician works in. At > present it is only summarized in "regulations" as: > > The CAUT Workplace: Administrative topics. > Concert Tuning and Preparations. > Historic instrument Tuning and Maintenance > Special Topics in Servicing Institutional Instruments > > A detailed outline of this curriculum title "Components of Endorsement" was > provided last year to council, and I expect that similar supporting > documentation in the form of of a beta Policy Handbook with a fleshed-out > curriculum will be provided this year, too. > > Regards, > > Bill > > Bill Shull, RPT, M.Mus. > CAUT Committee Member > > > In a message dated 5/12/2010 3:23:35 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > tannertuner at bellsouth.net writes: > > Yes, a certificate of merit from CAUT. Not a doctoral degree in every > conceivable facet of the trade plus tangents into other trades. If nothing > else, schools might also encourage their tech to attend Yamaha and Steinway > training seminars, which the CAUT degree would not, could not recognize. And > > since there is no way for a CAUT endorsement to recognize other training > programs considered highly respected and viable by university faculties and > performing artists, it renders the PTG CAUT endorsement uncredible. > Jeff > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Ilvedson" <ilvey at sbcglobal.net> > To: <tannertuner at bellsouth.net> > Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 8:32 PM > Subject: Re: [CAUT] Preaching to the choir;was University of Idaho Piano > Tech Vacancy > > > > If schools want to do on the job training, that's what they'll do. They > > do need to be aware of the talent pool out there and a certificate of > > merit from CAUT could start their education. PTG/CAUT needs to be > > bombarding music departments with this info. If nothing else, schools > > might require their tech to attend classes with PTG... > > > > David Ilvedson, RPT > > Pacifica, CA 94044
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC