RPT grandfathering

[MITCH KIEL]

        Recently here on PianoTech, there's been some discussion about
"grandfathering" of RPTs.
        PTG was created in 1958. Since that time, Council has voted to change
the RPT exams many times, most recently in 1991 (written). At every change,
all RPTs retained their status. For a volunteer (and voluntary) organization
such as ours, it would be impractical and politically foolhardy to repeatedly
snatch away an RPT's status he/she earned under previously accepted rules. (A
history of the RPT exam was published in the October 1994 Journal, page 48, in
the Examination and Test Standards (ETS) committee's monthly column "Movin 'On
Up," written by yours truly.)
        In today's PTG there are 2366 RPTs (and 1523 Associates).
Approximately 20% of RPTs (473) have passed all three current exams. That
means 80% (1893) have not. ETS and our volunteer examiners (we have only 131
CTEs) couldn't possibly re-test that many RPTs every time Council voted to
alter the RPT exam.
        The good news is that an increasing number of Associates are taking -
and passing - the current RPT exams. In 1992, 50 Associates upgraded to RPT,
and in 1993 49 upgraded. As of today, 57 Associates have upgraded in 1994 - a
15% increase over the last two year's average. And the year isn't over yet. At
this rate, 65 Associates will become RPTs in 1994. That would be an increase
of 29%.
        I expect this trend to continue and even to increase. Why?
1. PTG's recent educational efforts are encouraging and enabling more
Associates to successfully challenge our RPT exams.
2. Associates have an increased motivation to upgrade because the public is
becoming more aware of PTG and what it means to be an RPT, due in large part
to an increasing number of RPTs who use PTG's popular new marketing tools (for
example, PTG's new pamphlets and technical bulletins that describe the
difference between RPTs and Associates).
3. ETS is improving exam efficiency and visibility, and making the RPT exam
more fair, available, and accountable.
        Currently, ETS is hard at work increasing our examining capacity just
to keep up with current needs. Adding a few thousand exams to our present
workload is unrealistic and, quite frankly, undoable.

Mitch Kiel, ETS chair


Second point (removing my ETS hat to offer a bareheaded personal opinion):
        It's easy to confuse a symbol with what it represents. The everpresent
discussion about PTG membership categories, here and at ongoing Councils, is
an example.
        Piano techs are, by nature, detail lovers. We work all day lining
things up in straight lines. But politics, people, and the marketplace operate
under fuzzier and less controllable rules.
        Whether we call ourselves Associate or RPT, the real reasons for
success - on the concert stage or in the marketplace - are our technical and
people skills. Drawing a big red "RPT" on your chest and wearing a cape does
not automatically endow anyone with superpowers.
        Don't get me wrong. I'm an RPT and proud of it, and I'm constantly
telling customers and cold-callers the difference between Associate and RPT.
Clearly, my RPT activism has been a factor in building my business, my
reputation, and my skill level, as well as helped all PTG.
        I guess I'm making a plea for realistic expectations. Being an RPT is
not UNimportant, and we all need to continue our efforts to make it MORE
important, to both Associates and the public. It's just that bearing the RPT
label is not the ONLY thing that's important or even what's MOST important.

        What we call ourselves matters less than who we are or what we do.

Mitch Kiel, RPT