October 9-11, 2001
October 9, 2001
Core members convened at 6:00 p.m. for dinner and informal discussion about activities and action since the spring 2001 meeting and about agenda items. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
October 10, 2001
The meeting was convened at 8:00 a.m. by President Mary Deane Sorcinelli. Members present were: Roger Sell, Christine Stanley, Laurie Bellows, Bill Burke, Virleen Carlson, Dee Fink, Ken Grosse, Sally Kuhlenschmidt, Matt Kaplan, Virginia Lee, Stephanie Nickerson, Mathew Ouellett, Brenda Smith, Marila Svinicki, and Dorothy Zinmeister. President Sorcinelli announced that Alan Wright would be unable to attend the meeting because of illness. Also in attendance were Frank and Kay Gillespie.
The meeting opened with a small group activity to address two questions: 1) What you're leaving behind to come to this conference and 2) what you hope to take home.
The minutes of the spring 2001 meeting were approved with one correction. On p. 19 of the packet distributed to the Core Committee the first paragraph under "New Business" should read, "Jim Eison reported that Linc has asked Jim...".
MAS position/transition: Mary Deane reviewed the time line, going back several years. In the fall of 2000 the review of the position was formalized. In spring 2001 the Executive Committee was directed to solicit proposals to be concluded by June 2001. After it was agreed by electronic meeting and consensus to accept the proposal from Frank and Kay Gillespie, negotiations began for the transition period. As of October 1, David Graf's services as MAS will cease, and Kuntal Joshi will continue her employment until December 31st in order to provide follow-up for the conference and to assure an orderly transition. Frank and Kay will officially begin serving in the MAS position as of January 1, 2002, but they be working at this year's conference in order to begin the transition period. Frank and Kay reported briefly on their plans for the transition. Christine suggested that we move to the executive director model rather than the MAS position as it exists.
Awards and Recognition Committee: The following ideas were raised during the discussion of the proposal by Linc. Fisch for an award in recognition of Laurie Richlin and Milt Cox for their work with the Lilly conferences. 1) The issues of cost. 2) Is such an award appropriate for the "Spirit of POD"? 3) Perhaps there should be a "special merit" award. 4) Is it the "job" of the individuals suggested rather than a contribution "above and beyond"? 5) We could have two awards, given in alternating years - the "Spirit of POD" award and a "service to the field" award. 6) There was general favor towards recognizing the contribution of these individuals and also general favor towards recognizing the idea and "getting the conversation going".
* The matter is referred back to the committee for further discussion and recommendations for the spring 2002 Core meeting.
* To assist the committee Core members are requested to think of persons/programs who might fit a "special merit" or "service to the field" award and to pass such suggestions/ideas on to the committee (chaired by Christine).
During the discussion of awards the question arose as to the "Bright Ideas" and the website. Also, the Bright Ideas materials from 1994-99 appear to be lost. Discussion of the 3 recommendations from the Bright Ideas Committee were tabled for discussion under the topic of the website. (These recommendations were: 1) inclusion of a prominent link on the website to the POD awards, 2) A highly visible Bright Ideas link on the conference registration webpage, and 3) online submission through the website.)
Committee for the Advancement of Programs and Services (CAPS):
In response to the questions raised by the committee the following ideas were raised. 1) Invite Matt O., Christine, Virleen, Phyllis Worthy Dawkins, and interested others to lunch with the CAPS committee to discuss diversity issues relating to the Atlanta conference. 2) We should seek to establish connections and partnerships with the HBCU's and their Faculty Development Symposium not just for the 2002 conference, but also beyond. 3) We should ask what can POD do for and with them. 4) We could exchange conference summaries, establish links on our respective websites and promote connections between regional association. 4) We could explore visiting HBCU schools and talking with faculty. 5) We should promote co-presentations and collaboration. 5) We should encourage diverse candidates to self-nominate for the Core committee.
* The discussion of diversity issues and connecting with the HBCU's will continue within the CAPS committee, the Diversity Commission, and the conference planning group.
* The discussion of the on-line development program will continue. (In subsequent discussion Laurie and Dee were charged with coming up with some ideas for topics.)
Regarding the issue of volunteerism raised by the committee, the following thoughts were offered. 1) All are having to do more with less, and we might need to consider modest incentives such as travel funds. 2) At the very least we could present a certificate recognizing services. 3) We could send letters of thanks to appropriate administrators, copying the individuals concerned. 4) This issues is one that goes beyond volunteerism; it speaks to the balance of staff and quasi-staff.
Conference Program Committee: Sally reported that the on-line proposal process, in general, went well; and the Core agreed. Perhaps the next step is an on-line registration process. There is question as to acceptance of credit cards online. Perhaps there are businesses, such as Earthlink, that enable one to do this in secure manner. There was the suggestion to buy a server, but there are serious issues of maintenance and security to be considered. We should explore placement on a server, other than institutional. Conference data should be stored and maintained.
* Frank and Sally will explore on-line registration possibilities for next year's conference.
Diversity Commission: The requested item for action was ideas from the Core on appropriate ways "to do the assessment of the membership to determine the presence of a climate of diversity." * The following ideas were mentioned and will be forwarded to the Commission. 1) While an original idea was to do focus groups, right now we should see what data we already have. 2) This is a time of constrained resources. 3) We should definitely do the "climate assessment", but it would be very expensive to contract out; we need not go outside our organization for this expertise. 4) Perhaps we should do things in steps and begin with a focus on 2002 and the Atlanta conference. "Live it, and do it next year." 5) Perhaps we could fold the work into elsewhere, such as into a research grant. 6) We need to do the work now, it shouldn't be a non-issue. 7) We could do a survey at the next conference by having people with clipboards stopping people briefly as they walk by and asking a few questions. 8) We should ask volunteers to do "specific and doable tasks." 9) Go through conference evaluations and pull out comments on diversity. 10) Use regional consortia as another place to gather information. 11) Refer to mark Chestler's article in the To Improve the Academy. 12) We could create pairs to do focus groups. 13) The question was raised as to what the agenda of our organization is with regard to diversity, and who is responsible. [There is an extended statement on this topic to be found in the Policy and Procedures Handbook.] 14) We should place periodic reminders of the structure of the organization on the listserv and in the newsletter. 15) Add a section on committee reports to address how the committee activities relate to diversity.
The Diversity Commission still needs a vice-chair.
Grants Committee: The committee had requested consideration of developing a "standing session for all POD conferences with the expectation that grants projects will be presented." The Core discussed the overlap of this idea with the manner in which the Bright Ideas were presented this year and also with regard to the diversity travel and internship grants. It was suggested that we add the grants and awards winners to the poster session event sponsored by the Bright Ideas Committee this year. There were two differing opinions: 1) that it is not fair to put internship grant presentations into the regular proposal process and 2) that it is highly recommended to do so because in itself it is a good experience.
* The Diversity Commission and the Grants Commission are to discuss these issues and report back in the spring.
History and Archives Committee: The "requests for action" were acted upon.
* It was agreed that Frank and Kay will find the archives material already identified when they visit the POD office and assure that the material gets to Joyce Povlacs Lunde, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
* Replacing Joyce Povlacs Lunde, the appointment of Diane Morrison as POD co-historian, to serve until 2005 and renewable, was approved.
Nominations and Elections Committee: After discussion the following decision was reached.
* Laura Border was elected to the position of President-Elect.
Professional Development-Guidelines Subcommittee: In response to the request for funding for a meeting, the following was concluded.
* The idea of funding such a meeting was supported in theory but must be considered later during the budget discussion.
Professional Development-TA Development Subcommittee: The actions indicated below respond to the committee's requests.
* The request from the TA Developer's Subcommittee that the next general survey gather information on TA developers was taken under consideration. At this time, however, it was decided that no funds for separate/additional mail surveys will be allocated. Mary Deane will report in Spring 2002 on the survey of POD members which she and Ann Austin conducted in Summer 2001.
Thoughts relating to the request for funding two graduate students to attend the conference were as follows. 1) The students should be persons planning on going into faculty development, not discipline-specific. 2) Perhaps attendance at regional meetings would be lower cost. 3) What are the selection criteria? 4) Is the conference for TA's or for persons working with TA's?
* No decision was reached at this time as this matter relates to budget.
A question was raised as to whether or not we are double-paying for food if we allocate funds for a special TA developers' breakfast while, at the same time, participants are paying for food through their hotel charges. This will be considered by the Conference Planning Committee. There were recommendations and general agreement that we should determine priorities for our expenditures and that we should consider their impact as we make budget decisions. There was also agreement that budget requests should be linked to the strategic plan.
* The request for $500 funding for a TA developers' breakfast was not approved at this time as costs need to be examined by the Conference Planning Committee.
Publications Committee/new standing committee: Additional comments on the Teaching Excellence Essays and A Guide to Faculty Development were provided. The following emerged from the discussion.
* A new standing committee was created and named the Electronic Communication and Resources Committee, to be chaired by Bill Burke. Sally, Matt K., and Frank will be members of the committee, and the President-elect will be the Core liaison. The charge of the committee is to be developed in consultation with the ad hoc Subcommittee on the Redesign of the POD Website.
Sally will provide the liaison with the NTLF ad hoc committee and with the Bright Ideas.
Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Revising the POD Website: Frank clarified the confusion and history regarding the POD domain name and registry thereof. Several ideas emerged during the discussion. 1) Matt O. has a person for possible redesign of the site. 2) There are virtues to renting space on a server so as to enhance access via search engines. Moving away from institutional location of the website to a private provider will increase visibility and access. 3) The website is deserving of high priority. 4) The kind of work we do has been changed by the web.
* These ideas were referred to the new Electronic Communication and Resources Committee.
* The placement of the Bright Ideas on the website was also referred to the Electronic Communication and Resources committee.
Strategic Plan Revisited
Four groups were formed, one for each goal of the Strategic Plan, and two questions were addressed by the groups. 1) What has been accomplished over the past year? 2) What needs to be done, by whom, and with what time line. The discussion was facilitated by Roger Sell, President Elect.
[Miscellaneous: The "lead bird" metaphor met with favor.]
Group 1, Goal 1 - Support professional development of POD members and constituency groups: faculty developers (new, experienced, directors, staff) administrators (chairs, deans, and provosts), graduate students, and faculty members.
The strategies in the Plan have been completed.
The interest in an online professional development program is a part of this goal. (Kay will append the on-line proposal, already accepted by the Core, to these minutes, for general information.)
Additional ideas were mentioned. We should explore LERN's offerings. Not everything need be workshops; there could also be discussions and self-paced modules. Start small.
* Laurie and Dee agreed to come up with some ideas for topics for the on-line development effort. Sally suggested that our first undertaking be considered a "pilot".
Group 2, Goal 2 - Examine the effectiveness and responsiveness of POD as an organization for individual members and groups of members.
The survey conducted by Mary Deane and Ann Austin will provide us information relating to this goal. There is much yet to be done relating to the multicultural assessment. It was sugggested that we hold the focus groups in 2002 at the Atlanta conference and that these be co-facilitated by Core members.
* At Saturday night's dinner we will have a brief writing exercise to answer two questions. 1) When do you most feel a part of POD? 2) When do you feel most outside of POD? An optional question will be how many years the individual has been a member of POD.
* It was also recommended that we do a survey/writing exercise every two years to gather information.
Dorothy asked how we know when we've achieved the goals. Do we need another column that covers "indicators of success"? Is "examine" the right word in Goal 2? Are we ready for outcomes assessment?
Group 3, Goal 3 - Examine the functioning, structure, and organization of POD
All objectives have been met.
We still need to make sure that POD is responsive to the external environment, and the following strategies were articulated.
* The Strategic Plan will be reviewed annually by the Core as it relates to our responsiveness to the external environment. We will conduct a poll of Core members, beginning in August, regarding concerns about external environment issues.
* As decided earlier, the Executive Committee will generate alternative titles for the MAS position and bring a proposal to the Core Committee at the 2002 spring meeting.
* We need to develop a structure of record maintenance for committee work, and Kay and Frank will bring a proposal for procedures to the spring 2002 meeting.
Group 4, Goal 4 - Increase interaction with other organizations on local, regional, and international levels to promote the value of effective teaching and learning and faculty development within higher education.
* It was agreed that this goal should read "... on regional, national, and international levels . . . ".
In refining goals and objectives we should 1) reinvigorate the "overarching" leadership of the Outreach Committee ((it needs a Committee chair and a subcommittee chair for regional organizations), 2) consider the purpose and levels of endeavor, and 3) the "scaffolding" of efforts.
Things to do include the following. 1) Access Dee and Matt K.'s updated list of regional organizations, 2) enhance national outreach by personal connections at the national level (e.g. Gene Rice, ann Austin, Barbara Cambridge), 3) consideration of a return to the POD Sampler or a protected session at AAHE, 3) the continuation of a protected conference session on international matters, and 4) Roger's attendance at the next ICED conference in Australia.
5) Kay suggested that the NEA should be added to our concept of outreach.
In further discussion about the Strategic Plan, Roger suggested that the mission statement probably includes things that should not be there and that a full review of the statement is probably needed. Some things are also missing in the strategic plan, and we might wish to think about the alignment of organizational intent and action. This discussion and the plan are offered for reading and reflection, and the plan will be considered in the spring. Perhaps we could have an electronic discussion, and Sally suggested that this might be a pilot electronic activity.
* Kay will redo the chart, bringing in the new information.
Additional Conference Information: Bill announced that the conference had a pre-enrollment of 470 persons. This year a job fair is being offered for the first time; this is scheduled during a concurrent session time period. Sally also introduced a "reflection room". There will be special interest groups. Bill also explained that he had decided not to order a conference gift, rather to give the equivalent amount of money to organizations in relation to the events of September 11. There was discussion and concern expressed about doing this and how to do it. * The conclusion was to offer participants the chance to sign a note that they did indeed wish the equivalent amount of money to be given to organizations "consistent with the educational mission" of POD. Mary Deane and Bill will decide how to do this by Friday.
Adjournment: After a brief self-assessment
activity, the meeting was adjourned for the day.
October 11, 2001
Core members were reminded that reimbursement is in the amount of $150 for those days when the Core is meeting.
Long Range Conference Planning: The 2002 conference is scheduled for Atlanta, Georgia.
Several related issues were discussed - timing of the conference, urban settings vs. more distant places, regional clusters of members, the balance between fiscal responsibility and conference planning, and the financial realities of one-day conference participants. Mary Deane called attention to the location of members and conference locations.
The Core agreed to the following, including a "no holds barred" approach:
* Urban sites and secondary cities are o.k.
* Frank and Kay will explore the possibilities offered by a new meeting planner.
* 2003 - Southwest region (This could include Colorado.)
2004 - Central region
2005 - Northeast region
It was also agreed that we could explore possibilities in Canada (Quebec City, Montreal, and Toronto) and sites in Jamaica.
* It was also agreed that we should at all times maintain conference insurance, and Frank and Kay will check into the status of this.
Atlanta 2002 Conference: A small group activity generated many ideas in three areas - as follow.
Group 1 - Themes and Keynote speakers: Ideas for themes (brainstorming) included multiplicity and unity in teaching and learning, multiple perspectives coming together, reconstructing teaching and learning in a new world, building new alliances for teaching and learning, and building and rebuilding our future. Speaker suggestions were: Janetta Cole, Richard Light, Diane Kardia, Jimmy Carter, Jane Vella, David Schom, David Whyte, Andrew Young, Morris Dees, Nancy Kantor, Joanna Macy, someone on internationalization, and someone to address the topic of dialogue groups and mediation.
Group 2 - Issues of diversity: 1) With regard to infrastructure, invitations to participate in the resource fair could be sent to local institutions. Roommate matching services could be offered. At one meal participants could be assigned to tables with an assigned table captain. Bring in student performance groups from the local HBCU's. 2) With regard to program review, seek diverse reviewers and specifically ask about diversity. 3) With regard to content, workshops could be co-facilitated. Bring groups together by disciplinary groupings, almost like learning communities. 4) With regard to expeditions, invite a local historian, visit the Martin Luther King Center and/or Ebenezer Baptist Church, offer a tour of the local HCBU's. 5) With regard to fun: have a dinner dance at the Fox Theater, consider the Highlander Folk School.
Group 3 - Coordination and Processes: 1) Decide on chairpersons. 2) Update the conference planning notes and review them entirely. 3) Widely seek reviewers and volunteers, and * Bill and Sally will put that in the newsletter. Expand marketing efforts, and think about fund raising, perhaps through advertising in the program. Perhaps think about a volunteer to coordinate marketing efforts.
Additional miscellaneous comments about the conference: 1) Use visiting professors in the country. Remember the underlying mission of nurturing new talent. Sally is committed to following up on incorporating technology into conference proposal/registration procedures, and she may be willing to continue as program chair. 2) There was a suggestion to look into selling advertising space in the conference program. Publishers are enjoying the free space for the poster sessions, why not tap them for income for the programs?
Leadership Issues: The self-nomination form for positions on the Core will be included in the next newsletter. The issue of voting by categories was raised. Perhaps the ballot should include current members of the Core. There might be the possibility of ex-officio members from special groups. If we're serious about diversity, we need to recruit candidates actively. We should include more information about people, perhaps even link to their vitae. Should we continue to vote for 5 persons? Could we conduct electronic elections? * It was agreed that we would continue, at least for this fall, the same general election process with some modifications to the ballot and candidate information, perhaps including the invitation to include one's URL; and further issues are to be considered by the Nominations and Elections Committee.
Spring 2002 Core meeting: The AAHE meeting is scheduled for March 16-19 in Chicago. * It was agreed that there would be a one-day only Core meeting and that Core members should arrive Friday night for dinner, followed by an all-day meeting on Saturday, to be held in the AAHE hotel, the Chicago Hilton and Towers.
New Business: The following items were raised as new business.
These notes were taken by Kay Herr Gillespie