Coleman vs Coleman Tuneoff

[Wimblees@AOL.COM]

I have read with interest most of the replies to Jim's post, and I have a
couple of comments to make. 

First of all, I think the temperament section of the exam become more
difficult in about 1984 or 85. I remember I was on the Board at the time, and
Ruth Ann Jordan was Chair of the ETS Committee. The subject was being
discussed at Council, and Ruth Ann mentioned that the reason the exam needed
to be made more difficult was too many tuners were passing the exam. I could
not understand why we needed to tighten the exam, just because too many tuners
were passing it. I questioned, how few people need to be passing before we say
the exam is hard enough. I voted against the proposal. Now Jim comes on and
basically says that perhaps the temperament is scored too high. I don't want
to say, "I told you so," but why has it taken this long to see the point I was
trying to make?

Over the last 15 years I have given dozens of exams. And one of the most
frustrating parts of the exam, and the most time consuming, is to stand there
and listen to an interval over and over again, to see if it beats 6 times or 7
time a second, to confirm the fact the a note fell out of the sequence. I
agree with Jim that lowering the standard of the temperament section is not
going diminish the quality of the exam. It will however, bring more RPT's in
the Guild, members who will be greatly appreciated at the chapter as well as
national level of the PTG.

Since obviously this is going to require some sort of Bylaw change, we cannot
implement a change this year. But I would encourage the ETS Committee to study
this subject, and make appropriate proposals for consideration at next year's,
(2000) Council Session.

Wim