[CAUT] A Project that might Work AND Pianopedia

[Ed Sutton]

David-

The project I've proposed would be under the auspices of the PTG/CAUT 
Committee with the Journal Editor as "ex officio" member.
It would be an opportunity for the CAUT Committee to establish and present 
some ideas about high-level piano maintenance. Perhaps a process by which 
the CAUT Committee establishes "standards."
It would not require developing any new search programs, wikis or such.
It would require developing an outline of material to be covered, a pattern 
or template for the articles, a coordinating committee and a review 
structure, and some final editing and preparation for publishing.  Materials 
developed would be the property of PTG and could be used again in other 
formats.
More important, it would require/enable the people involved to develop 
skills of working, communicating and examining ideas together.
The product would be a body of shared thinking and experience about 
high-level piano maintenance.
Because the project would involve hands-on sifting, evaluating and editing 
of the CAUT archive material, the people doing the work would become 
familiar with the material, and would be able to offer knowledgeable 
opinions about the value and possible use of that material.
I recently participated in the process of revising the written exams, and 
have a good opinion of what a dedicated, well-coordinated committee can do.
Again, I see this as being a CAUT/PTG project which establishes which seeks 
to develop some fairly high-level material which represents "CAUT Standards 
of Piano Maintenance." My impression is that Fred is planning an independent 
and very different project, but Fred should speak to that.

Ed Sutton


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Skolnik" <davidskolnik at optonline.net>
To: "Ed Sutton" <ed440 at mindspring.com>; "College and University Technicians" 
<caut at ptg.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:45 AM
Subject: Re: [CAUT] A Project that might Work AND Pianopedia


> Fred / Ed -
>
> Just before Fred's idea moves off-list, is it possible to agree upon the 
> distinctions of your approaches?  Both entail, in part, drawing material 
> from list or lists, and both envision some sort of collective effort in 
> the synthesizing of the results, but there are clearly some differences in 
> vision.  I'm  wondering if you perceive the efforts as complementary or, 
> at least potentially, conflicting?
>
> Thanks
>
> David Skolnik
> Hastings on Hudson, NY
>
>
>
>