ASEE ELD Extended Executive Committee Meeting, Salt Lake City

June 23, 2004, 4:30-6:00 pm

 

Chaired by Andy Shimp

Present: Jay Bhatt, John Teleha, Christy Hightower, Bob Heyer-Gray, Amy Van Epps, Larry Thompson, Greg Raschke, Andy Shimp, Jill Powell, Mel DeSart, Liz Mengel, Mary Steiner, Stephen Stich

 

Agenda

 

A.  Committee Reports & Updates

 

B.  Elections

1.  Review of online ballot

2.  Timing of elections.  Should we consider advancing the election cycle (i.e., April 1)?  Pros: newly elected officers can plan for conference responsibilities.  Cons: Requires change to bylaws; less time for Nominating Committee work

 

C.  Conference paper peer review process

 

          1.  Andy will update Bylaws Addendum II

          2.  Include expectations for reviewers

 

D.  Salt Lake City Conference Review

 

          1. Questions, comments, complaints

2.  Do we like the Get Acquainted format?   Should we do a single roundtable discussion with pre-arranged topics instead of breaking into small groups?

3.  Do committee chairs prefer to have an assigned room for committee meetings like last year?

 

E. Portland conference planning (Jill Powell)

 

1.  Session topics to consider

2.  Scheduling ideas

3.  Sponsored activities: Should we seek higher levels of support or additional sponsors for new events?

4.  Moderator gifts with the ELD logo

 

 

A. Committee Reports and Updates

 

Bob Heyer-Gray asked about web page changes. Can he make them without asking Executive Committee (EC) permission? Andy said yes, and he can copy someone from the EC if he is uncertain.

 

Christy – 2 liaisons have requested feedback. Ginny Baldwin (ALA SciTech) has questions about survey. She asked us to give her feedback but since this came only last Friday it will have to wait until after the conference. Jay has questions about information literacy. He is going to go to the information literacy group (Stephanie White).

 

Christy re punch list. SLA's PAM and Engineering Divisions reviewed the punch list and liked it.  Although SLA may not allow the Divisions to officially endorse the punch list, the Divisions are interested in supporting it.  They plan to link to the document from their web sites. The SLA Sci Tech Division already put a link to the punch list from their home page in the section where reports from the June conference are listed, but the link doesn't imply a recommendation or support.  Christy will follow-up with Ginny Baldwin, the SLA Sci Tech liaison, to see if they plan to do more.  Members of the task force that developed the punch list plan to write an article for a library journal with an audience outside of Sci Tech to encourage wider conversation of the punch list issues.  The task force also has other promotion ideas that they will bring to the EEC for review in the near future.

 

 

Larry – suggested that EC set up publisher, vendor liaisons? Publishers need to be reminded that 100 librarians are here and this is often the only conference they go to all year. It probably shouldn’t be the same person who does development (sponsors) because these are different people in the organization. It is McGraw-Hill, Wiley, and others (a different group) that need to hear from us. Elsevier and our current sponsors know we are here.

 

Membership directory – Liz said they will add under expertise those who are on the board of a publisher advisory group. Amy will write an authentication script so that we can access the directory from the ELD Web site. The directory is now in an access database. It would need to be a web page if we included pictures. Most of EEC were against this, they thought it would be too much work.

 

JSTOR – At the ELD annual meeting John Saylor wondered if we should dissolve this due to JSTOR’s lack of interest in engineering journals.  John Teleha reported that the Chancellor of NCA&TSU is on the Jstor Board and he will investigate.  Larry also volunteered to work on it.

Awards - Greg updated the description of the Bernhardt Award and got the
ASEE to list the ELD award descriptions on their website.  Past winners are
also listed [but are not current].  As ASEE has moved up the date they need
the winners reported, we will need to move up the date for nominations to
the beginning of March.  John will work on this and update the ELD Awards
webpages accordingly. 

 

John will look into corporate sponsorship for the Bernhardt Award.  We have received an expression of interest from a potential sponsor for the Bernhardt award.  In order to accept sponsorship, we will require a written guarantee of a multi-year commitment (i.e., 5 years) from an executive of the organization.  Instead of renaming the award, we would recognize the sponsorship by referring to the award as the "Homer Bernhardt award sponsored by xxxxx.”

 

Development - Stephen Stich had 3 people interested in being on development committee. Amy agreed to be liaison to IEEE, since she they sponsor the new member reception.

 

B.  Elections

 

Amy on Voting – Andy thought the process went very well. Amy wants to know who gets the results. Just nominations committee or voting administrator, who else? Should ELD Chair have access so he can get people to vote (those who are not on list)? We have some teaching faculty who are also members of ELD, some retirees. They have to be contacted separately. When do they get notified? Larry thinks snail mail should be sent at the same time the electronic ballot goes up. Chair will send reminders to vote, Amy won’t have to do that.

 

Timing? Should the results be moved up? New officers will know they have to go to EC,etc. Cons –it  requires a change in the bylaws. This would advance the schedule for nominating committee, they would have to recruit earlier. Andy reports that ASEE headquarters elections are complete April 1. Instead of November, we could send out candidate names in December. Most Divisions do it like we do now, at the conference.  Mel says as chair of nominating, he told nominees about staying for this meeting and their potential responsibilities. Those who aren’t elected have to stay for naught? Greg thought if we have electronic voting we might as well use its advantages. Greg volunteered to work on amending the bylaws. Larry volunteered to work on it with Greg. Mel said 2/3 of those voting must vote for the amendment for it to pass.

 

C. Conference paper peer review process

 

Andy revised the Bylaws Addendum II. In addition to making procedural corrections, he also included a section outlining the responsibilities of reviewers.  The EC voted to accept the changes.

 

Andy attended an ASEE-sponsored session on writing and reviewing papers, and came away with some useful ideas.  He will work with the Chair of Publications to develop a guide for reviewers.

 

D. Salt Lake City Conference Review

 

The increase in catered events helped the lunchtime problem. Andy suggested he could ask ASEE to have technical sessions on Sunday instead of just workshops before picnic so we could have more sessions. They could also allow more concurrent technical sessions (that’s why some of ours get bumped). It is 20 concurrent right now, we think. 

 

Greg thought the Roy Tennant and other sessions were great. It’s nice to have outside people and new ideas. We liked the mix of ELD and non- ELD sessions. The cosponsoring with ERM (Jay) was also nice. The XML and ethics session brought in people from outside ELD.

 

Larry would like to give guest speakers more time to interact with ELD members. Don King was invited to speak, but he only had about 20 minutes. If we invite someone to travel to the conference, wouldn't it be better to have more time to interact with him or her?

 

We invited Roy to banquet, but he didn’t have time to attend. Several moderators had too many speakers. 4 speakers were too much, Jill will try to keep it down to 3 next year so there is time for discussion. All of EEC agreed. This year Andy would have had to put speakers in poster sessions otherwise or at a 7 am meetings (not popular). Many members would not attend a 7 am session. This is the first year ASEE cancelled sessions due to lack of rooms. They probably take turns cancelling sessions for different divisions, so we would eventually get hit.

 

Andy reported that two categories of speakers were not included in the final printed program: (1) guest speakers (non-ASEE members) and (2) members who submitted papers that were not accepted for publication.  These speakers appeared in the online session locator.  Andy will contact ASEE to report the problems so that they can be corrected next year.  Can we ask ASEE to check the final program to see if it's OK before it goes to press? The new program chair  (Jill) will follow-up on this.

 

Get Acquainted session – it was suggested that we have a facilitator at each table to lead the discussion. Moderator can select facilitators. Someone could take notes. Should there be fewer topics? There was merging of some groups, and some had very few people. Large sizes make it difficult to have good discussions. Perhaps we should make a couple separate tables for instruction, since it is a popular topic. A big room is important.. Andy asked for large room this year. We need 100 seats.

 

Larger projections screens  would be better. We should ask ASEE for equipment verification, so we can show them a copy of what we asked for when there are problems.

 

Banquet – Mary suggested changing it to NOT a ticketed event. Just register with moderator. There were false signups with non ELD and students registering. ASEE should check to see if this is possible. Jill will investigate, it may or may not be possible.

 

Morgan and Claypool want to sponsor something. Breakfast on Tuesday morning? The Annual ELD Business meeting at 8:30 am or 10:30 am. Larry will help talk to Morgan about sponsorship.

 

E. Portland Conference Planning

 

Jill then presented some choices for next year’s sessions in Portland. She put up a list of ideas and asked for suggestions. She also added suggestions she received from members from the past few days.

 

Larry mentioned we might want to have a Chinese librarian as speaker and Elsevier might support the travel expenses for this. The Chinese Ei site gets more hits than the Hoboken site.

 

Below are the topics. Jill asked EEC members to vote for their top 5 to give her an idea of which themes to pursue – here is how they voted. She will form a program committee to assist her in planning. The committee will most likely consist of the first year director, the secretary-treasurer, the ELD chair, and a volunteer.

 

CopyLeft, Orphan Works, and the Creative Commons -Lawrence Lessig of Stanford Law School       13

Re-energizing the Mid-Career Professional  11

(such as Kate Thomes for Engineer-at-Sea)

Open Access Journals                            11

Open Source Culture                             6

Interdisciplinary research                      4
(Linda Ackerson at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign)

Mentoring/Supervising/Managing          5

Entrepeneurship - Powells.com           2

Vendor Partnerships                     2

Nurturing Information Literacy K-12     2

Collection Development (Ensuring Collective Research Library on the Web)        1

Patriot Act                                     1

Digital Publishing and Effective Peer Review    1

 

Meeting Adjourned

 

Notes by Jill Powell, Program Chair, jhp1@cornell.edu