Why I hate the CPF exam... (CPF Study Guide)

[Andrew Lenz Jr.]

Actually, I don't hate the CPF exam. But some things drive me crazy.

Here's an example question from the study guide:


23. A customer wants a piece of papyrus float mounted. She chooses a moulding 1-1/2" wide for the frame. The outside dimensions of the frame will be 16" x 20". How much moulding will you need to make this frame?


My answer:

We're talking OUTSIDE not inside, so the moulding width is irrelevant. Also, since the size is fixed there is no allowance to consider. (Width and allowance are only considerations for the contents of the frame.)

16"+20"+16"+20" = 72" + saw blade width or chopper waste . . . figure at least 1/2" to 2" for the waste factor, so at least 72-1/2" to about 74" or so.

Available answers are:
A. 84"
B. 72"
C. 78"
D. 90"

Hmmmm. The minimal possible length of those provided is 78". So "C".

But wait! WRONG! The answer key says it's "B", that is, 72"!

Now, I'd like to see any framer cut a 16x20 outside dimension frame from a piece of 72" moulding. It's impossible. ("Impossible" as in "no flippin' way" and the answer should not be "C".)

I originally boycotted the CPF exam when it came out in the 1980s since there was no physical test, it was all theoretical. You could have a CPF who cut horrible mats. (It's happened, we've redone such orders by CPFs.) I've "come around" and I will take it when I eventually get around to it, I'm not in a hurry . . . now that you can take it online under special supervision, that's pretty convenient.

But the test questions kind of drive me nuts. If I take the test, I want a chance to argue the answers!

There's my whining for today. I can whine about a couple other sample questions later...

Andrew

 

[Kai Vanuffelen]

Andrew,
I was once at a doctor and looked at all his certificates on the wall. Made a complimentary comment about them, but he just said they are wallpaper. Without them he would not have been sitting in that chair.
The CPF exam serves many purposes. One of them is to impress customers who come to you instead of the opposition. We're professional framers who are in the business of making money and we also like framing, which is important. I never met a framer who hates framing!

It does not really matter how many questions a candidate gets wrong or right, as long as the candidate passes the thresshold (meets the criteriums of the exam) and receives the certificate. After passing and hanging the certificate next to the counter, you can laugh about some of the silly questions in the test and thank your lucky stars, that you do not have to sit that same exam again.
Passing an exam is one thing, gaining experience in framing is another. That takes a lot longer.

After one year, with four years actual experience as a pictureframer, candidates can sit the practical MCPF exam. Potentially this can bring in customers from far afield with fat wallets, because there are not that many MCPF'S compared to CPF's.
Alternatively you can sit the part practical, part theoretical GCF exam.

 

[Michael Mintz]

I've been in the business for 33 years and have never (and will never) take the CPF exam. Why? I am completely confident in my knowledge and ability. The CPF designation means nothing to the public. They've never heard of it and don't really care. One's reputation is far more important. The CPF designation is more for the industry and self gratification. I don't require the the ego stroking. Don't get me wrong, I'm not disparaging it. I just don't think my clients give a rip.

 

[Mike Labbe]

I'm NOT a CPF, but Andy Langlois from our shop is. On the contrary, that certification brings us a lot of business that we otherwise would not have. :thumb:

In my opinion, It instills confidence that we have training in the currently accepted standards for preservation framing.

I agree that some of it is just a personal achievement to validate framing education, but it also helps the bottom line. There is true value in the material that has to be studied, and even old time framers will learn a lot. The treatment methods of the industry are constantly changing and improving, and this is a great way to stay up to date. (through recertifications, attending meetings, etc)

That's my opinion, in any case.

Mike

 

[Michael Mintz]

I'm not in the least bit questioning the value of the content of the exam and knowledge required thereof. The issue of being an old time framer does not, however, mean that we are not as up to date as anyone else. To believe that is folly. I can only address my market when I say that it is meaningless to the public. I'm certainly not implying that I can speak for anyone else. If using the CPF designation works as a marketing tool for one's business, congrats. I still am not convinced that the average customer either knows or cares as long as they have confidence in you.

 

[Andrew Lenz Jr.]

My post was not to disparage the CPF designation, I'm just venting about what I believe to be a wrong answer on the Study Guide.

Though I'll put my (non-CPF) 30 years of framing against any CPF with 1 or 2 or 3 years of experience. But I'd also put a 1-year CPF against nearly any big box framer any day.

My uncle (now retired from framing) who originally trained me as a "wee lad" took the CPF test and passed. I'm a much better test-taker than he is. I'm not too worried about passing it . . . unless there are a lot of questions on the current test like the one I'm complaining about. I'm a perfectionist and I'd hate to get knocked down over what I consider to be poorly-written questions.

Andrew

 

[John Barlowe]

Agree about poorly written questions

My post was not to disparage the CPF designation, I'm just venting about what I believe to be a wrong answer on the Study Guide.
I'm a perfectionist and I'd hate to get knocked down over what I consider to be poorly-written questions.

Andrew

In my former life I was a licensed contractor and a licensed home inspector which both requied sitting for and passing tests. Those tests as well had poorly written questions. Taking such a test requires that you know what answer they want, not so much what is the correct answer from those choices. Rediculous in my opinion.

I value PPFA, but at this point in my life, I am not so inclined to sit for another test. All of the PPFA ribbons that I have on my wall, do instill confidence from my customers though.

 

[Kai Vanuffelen]

We are all entitled to our opinions and we cannot change other's opnions easily.
Would we be able to drive a car without a license?
In most countries electricians, plumbers, lawyers, accountants, doctors, engineers etc. need to be qualified, certified or whatever. Perhaps one day in the future framers need to be qualified before they can practice as professional framers.

It is hard to tell whether potential customers walking past our shopdoor at night while returning from the movies and see the sticker on the door 'Certified Framer on Staff " will be encouraged to entrust their 1844 sampler that has been past down from generation to generation to us or to the framer a bit further on, who does not have this sticker on the door.

I would say, pay a few hundred dollars, sit the test, pass it, grumble about the need, and hopefully hear your cash-register ring faster and louder because of it. See it as an investment. The same as investing thousands of dollars in having a large variety of molding samples hanging on the wall. Just to have more and varied samples hanging on the wall than the framer a street away. Think about what you can do with the extra money coming in. Go out for dinner with the family, go on a trip for the weekend.

Some things in life like paying tax, we just have to do. We can grumble about where the money is going to ( cruise-missiles), but we have no choice. We do have a choice with regard to sitting the exam or not, but in my opinion, the benefits of sitting the exam outweigh the negative sides.

 

[Jim Miller MCPF GCF]

I don't know when the Study Guide was last reviewed/revised, but it seems odd that such an obvious error could go unnoticed. Of course it should be corrected in the next printing, but it would be foolish to scrap the whole batch of printed documents for only an error on a sample question.

...I originally boycotted the CPF exam when it came out in the 1980s since there was no physical test, it was all theoretical...I've "come around" and I will take it when I eventually get around to it...

The CPF exam is still a written test. What changed your mind? Are you working toward the MCPF exam, which is the world's best test of manual framing skills?

...You could have a CPF who cut horrible mats. (It's happened, we've redone such orders by CPFs.)

Framers who disdain certification often say they know of poorly-skilled CPFs, and I wonder why. I hope you are not suggesting that CPFs generally do sub-standard framing. That would not only be incorrect, but it would also be offensive to hundreds of CPFs who do excellent framing.

Or, if you are suggesting that lazy, sloppy framers are attracted to the CPF exam as a substitute for doing better work, that would make no sense. It would be much easier to improve one's skills than to engage the ongoing learning process that goes with certification.

Moreover, that sort of statement indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of the CPF program. It has always been about knowledge, especially on preservation framing, and it has never been about manual skills.

...If I take the test, I want a chance to argue the answers!

Argue the answers? Every question on the exam has been thoroughly vetted and the answers are all taken from the most credible, published sources in the industry. If you volunteer for the PPFA Certification Board and participate in the next review of the exam, you would have the opportunity to make sure that every question meets your high standards. The framing industry would benefit.

 

[Jim Miller MCPF GCF]

...I am completely confident in my knowledge and ability.

...The issue of being an old time framer does not, however, mean that we are not as up to date as anyone else. To believe that is folly.

Confidence is a good thing. I won't ask how you know your framing knowledge is completely up to date, but congratulations.

Framers who want to earn the CPF and MCPF designations must be less confident than you are, regardless of their years in the back room. They have no way to know how much knowledge they might have missed in their experience, and they welcome an opportunity to see how their expertise stacks up against the established framing standards, which contnue to evolve. Curiously, they always benefit from the ongoing learning process. As we continue to learn, we realize there is always more to learn. Funny how that works.

"The larger the island of knowledge, the longer the shoreline of wonder." (Ralph W. Sockman)

The CPF designation means nothing to the public. They've never heard of it and don't really care...I just don't think my clients give a rip.

That's surely true, but impressing clients is not the purpose of the GCF, CPF, and MCPF designations. Certification programs are for the self-improvement of framers, not for a marketing advantage. However, some framers do find an advantage in advertising their credentials, anyway.

One's reputation is far more important.

More important than a marketing advantage? Okay. But is reputation more important than the purpose of certification, which is the ongoing learning process that leads to better framing? I think that goes hand-in-hand with keeping a good reputation.

I don't require the the ego stroking...Don't get me wrong, I'm not disparaging it.

Framing credentials are not for everyone. You are welcome to your opinion and nobody should think less of you for it. PPFA is an inclusive association, which welcomes even the CPFs who cut horrible mats.:thumb:

 

[Cliff Wilson MCPF]

... The CPF designation means nothing to the public. They've never heard of it and don't really care. One's reputation is far more important. The CPF designation is more for the industry and self gratification. ...

Funny, I hear this the most from people that haven't acquired the designation.

A quick story for you ... I started my business ten years ago. I acquired the CPF designation as soon as I could. I started advertising that I was a CPF as soon as I had it. The other framers in town had been there for an average of about twenty-five years. One of the longest in business, told me it didn't matter, that the public didn't care.

I continued to advertise and even sent the woman who worked for me to get hers. I advertised that.
My business grew every year. After about six years, the gentleman who told me it didn't matter went and passed the CPF exam. I guess I was hurting his business.

Was it just the CPF designation? Probably not, but I have grown at least a little bit every year and the others are struggling.

Oh yeah, I do work for a Presidential memorabilia museum that I acquired as a client BECAUSE of my credentials.

I am now getting referrals from local conservators and historical organizations that started because they saw the MCPF designation in my advertisement and came in and asked about it.

I have no "proof," but I believe my credentials were and are instrumental in my business's success.

 

[Andrew Lenz Jr.]

Jim, first off, I would never suggest that all CPFs do substandard work. On the contrary, I'd say most do good work. My point was that when the test came out I was unhappy that it didn't test for the quality of workmanship. I had been expecting more. A customer can pick a CPF shop and walk out the door with a mat with big overcuts; granted, that should be more rare than not. (I'm starting to believe overcuts on mats are common fare for more shops than not, unfortunately.) I am happy that a CPF shop would know not to drymount a thermal-printed ticket or put a buffered board on a blueprint.

As for participating in the PPFA Certification Review Board, how do I sign up? I am seriously interested. I'll need to actually take the test first, of course.

As I said in my first sentence, I really don't hate the CPF exam. I just wouldn't want to be marked down due to questions that should have been worded better.

Andrew

 

[David Lantrip MCPF GCF]

Actually, I don't hate the CPF exam. But some things drive me crazy.

Here's an example question from the study guide:


23. A customer wants a piece of papyrus float mounted. She chooses a moulding 1-1/2" wide for the frame. The outside dimensions of the frame will be 16" x 20". How much moulding will you need to make this frame?


My answer:

We're talking OUTSIDE not inside, so the moulding width is irrelevant. Also, since the size is fixed there is no allowance to consider. (Width and allowance are only considerations for the contents of the frame.)

You are correct, I this case we're looking at the outside overall size, not the rabbet size. The moulding width is irrelevant, and the standard allowance is already figured into the dimensions given. In this question there is more information given than is really needed, but part of taking an exam is knowing what information is important and which is not, just as in real life.

16"+20"+16"+20" = 72" + saw blade width or chopper waste . . . figure at least 1/2" to 2" for the waste factor, so at least 72-1/2" to about 74" or so.

Available answers are:
A. 84"
B. 72"
C. 78"
D. 90"

Hmmmm. The minimal possible length of those provided is 78". So "C".

But wait! WRONG! The answer key says it's "B", that is, 72"!

Now, I'd like to see any framer cut a 16x20 outside dimension frame from a piece of 72" moulding. It's impossible. ("Impossible" as in "no flippin' way" and the answer should not be "C".)

When an exam is written and when you're taking it, you have to realize that in many cases you have to disregard a few variables. In the case of this question, there is no way in the world it could take into account every possible cutting method and various saw kerfs, etc. Even then someone would come along and argue that the answer is wrong because it doesn't take into account a flaw or a scratch 3/4 inch long fifteen inches from the end of the stick of moulding. Just like when you too the SAT of every other exam in your life, you choose the BEST answer from those presented.

Maybe the question would be less objectionable is if asked for the minimum amount of moulding required?

I originally boycotted the CPF exam when it came out in the 1980s since there was no physical test, it was all theoretical.

It still is. The MCPF exam is very much hands-on; the candidate must submit four pieces of artwork framed in advance, and one is done at the test site.

 

[Jim Miller MCPF GCF]

As for participating in the PPFA Certification Review Board, how do I sign up? I am seriously interested. I'll need to actually take the test first, of course.

Contact a member of the PPFA Certification Board and express your interest:
Joyce Michels, MCPF, Chair
David Lantrip, MCPF
Ellen Collins, MCPF

I'm not sure this is from the latest revision, but here is a snippet from the Certification Procedures and Guidelines, August, 2011...

...2.0 Certification Board Member Requirements

2.1 The Certification Board shall appoint an individual to serve on the Certification Board for a term of three years. Terms shall be staggered to insure that only one member will rotate off the Board in any given year. The Certification Board members shall not serve for more than a total of six years or two complete, three-year terms. One member will rotate off the Board at the end of the annual convention and be replaced by a member appointed by the current PPFA Certification Board. It is recommended that all members be an MCPF, but not required. All matters pertaining to Certification shall be decided by a minimum of two-thirds of the members. The person with the most seniority on the Certification Board shall be the appointed Chairperson.

 

[Kai Vanuffelen]

A reporter once asked Sir Edmund Hillary, a beekeeper from New Zealand, who was the first person to climb Mt. Everest, why he climbed Mt. Everest. Ed's reply was simply : " Because it was there ".

 

[Andrew Lenz Jr.]

David, I have no objection to a question providing irrelevant information, I think it's actually clever to include information that could "trick" a less-experienced framer. As for "best answer", I'll leave it to Jim's comment of it being an obvious error---when the "correct" answer is impossible to achieve with any cutting method on the planet, that answer cannot the "best" of the possible answers given. If the question were worded something like "not including waste..." then I'd have no complaint.

And, yes, I know the CPF test is still theoretical and not empirical. Had the MCPF and CPF been a combined test 25 years ago, I would have taken it then. That was my mindset as young framer. I considered the CPF test to be incomplete . . . part of me still does. But CPF program can do nothing but good for our trade and the trade is better for it.

Jim, thanks for the information.

And David, please know that I appreciate the efforts of you and the others on the committee. I just disagree with some wording as being unintentionally vague. My degree is in computer science. I was trained to be very precise in my language and be very literal. No offense intended.

Andrew

 

[Jim Miller MCPF GCF]

It would be a mistake to judge the CPF program by one sample question in the Study Guide, which of course would never be used on the actual exam. Andrew, when you earn a place on the Certification Board, you will have the opportunity to rewrite the questions in cooperation with the other volunteers on that Board. Reviewing and rewriting the CPF exam is an interesting process, which occurs regularly.

You are right to study hard for the CPF exam, regardless of your years of framing experience. In order to learn about preservation framing methods and materials, and to pass the CPF exam, one must absorb everything in the Study Guide's recommended references.

It may come as a surprise that decades of experimentation in the shop teach almost nothing useful toward earning the CPF designation. Classes and magazine articles (bless my fellow educators and writers) provide only spotty information on isolated topics. Trouble is, without a well-organized, planned learning track to run on, such as the CPF program, you never know about information that is missing.

There are no statistics to prove my theory, but I believe that most of the 40-percent-or-so who fail the CPF exam on their first try are veteran framers who think their years of framing experience have taught them all they need to know. Their lack of specific knowledge becomes painfully clear about halfway through the exam.

It is notable that the CPF candidates who fail on their first try, then study and retake the exam, usually pass it on their second try. I know several of them, who have continued to study and eventually earn the MCPF designation, as well. A culture of learning develops in the process of continuing education, which greatly benefits these framers over time, and there is no end to it. When you hunger for knowledge, it tastes pretty good.

Unfortunately, some who fail their their first CPF exam decide to abandon their quest for the achievement. If they are embarrassed about their failure, that might account for some disparaging remarks we occasionally hear about the program. One framer actually told me that, since exam did not test what he knows, which is all he needs to know, then the CPF designation must not be worth earning.

Thus, the culture of learning that so greatly benefits some framers completely eludes some others. That is not to say framers lacking credentials must be less capable. There are lots of exceptional framers who develop their own educational programs, continue learning and progressing, and never bother to take the tests. Trouble is, it may be difficult to distinguish them from the ones who stopped learning years ago; the 20-year veteran framers who have two years' experience ten times over.

 

[Andrew Lenz Jr.]

One framer actually told me that, since exam did not test what he knows, which is all he needs to know, then the CPF designation must not be worth earning.

That's crazy.


I'm one of the "I want to know" type of people. For example, we have two aspects to our business, custom framing and artist materials. One small paint manufacturer said he thought I was secretly a "wannabe paint maker" since I asked so many unusually detailed questions. (I can tell you exactly why Cadmium Red dries faster than Quinacridone Red and can give you a analogy for the molecular size difference between Cadmium Red and Indian Yellow, for instance.) On the framing side, I already own most of the books suggested for the CPF exam . . . literally have a 4-foot shelf above my desk full of framing books and magazines that I've kept for reference.


I'm sure the vast majority of the questions on the CPF exam are not debatable. (And, yes, I wouldn't expect sample questions to appear on the actual test!)


And you're absolutely right about years of experience not necessarily equating to knowledge. Some number of years ago, we hired a fellow who had previously operated his own frame shop. I was appalled at his poor expectations of quality and lack of knowledge. He didn't last long.


Andrew