PHILOSOPHY of EDUCATION SOCIETY
title
PES EXECUTIVE BOARD MINUTES, 2006
Thursday, April 20, 2006 (Chair Sharon Bailin) and Monday, April 24 (Chair
Susan Laird)
1. Approval of minutes of 2005 Executive Board Meeting and 2005 Business
Meeting
Bob Floden moved to approve, Debbie Kerdeman seconded; minutes approved
2. President’s Report – Sharon Bailin
It’s been an interesting year, not without a few challenges, but largely smooth and productive. One of the primary challenges was the necessity of finding a new Kneller lecturer after the late cancellation by Seyla Benhabib. The logistics of holding a conference in Mexico also kept us all busy and creative, but I feel that the rewards were worth the additional effort. Heartfelt thanks to all those who contributed to the working of the Society, in particular: Daniel Vokey, who, along with the rest of the Program committee, did an admirable job, especially considering the new challenge of refereeing submissions in Spanish; Shelby Sheppard, who stepped into the breach as Hospitality Chair with great aplomb; and Sasha Sidorkin, who mastered an extremely steep learning curve as Executive Director on the first day, and was innovating and revising our systems by the second. To serve in this role has been a pleasure and an honour. Thank you all.
3. Executive Secretary’s Report
Membership
At the start 2005 meeting, 397 members have paid for 04-05; some paid
later, so we had 447 paying members in 04-05 FY. On April 18, 2006, 465
members have already paid their 05-06 dues, more can be expected. Here
are the membership numbers for recent years:
1989-90 239
1990-91 250
1991-92 279
1992-93 310
1993-94 322
1994-95 358
1995-96 465
1996-97 441
1997-98 459
1998-99 527
1999-00 522
2000-01 479
2001-02 459
2002-03 445
2003-04 477
2004-05 447
2005-06 465 (plus expected late payers)
Conference Registration
At the start of the conference, only 94 people have paid or pre-registered
without pay. If we add those names on the program, 148 people plan
to attend. This is lower than usual because of the cost of travel.
However, we have a number of new participants, especially from Mexico.
We may have a new on-line registration system for the next meeting
New Members
We have 54 new members so far this year, which is about the same as in
the last few years. Clap.
Financial Status
We have 145,492.11 of total assets; the same as last year. Our finances
are secure. We have saved approximately $1200 on switching to mostly
electronic communications with members. I only mail about 60 letters,
instead of the usual 500. Members, please opt out of the hard copy
option.
Website transition
I have taken over from Craig Cunningham maintenance of the site. He did
a great job, but it was an extra step in communications
Move to Greeley
I have accepted a position at University of Northern Colorado. No effect
on PES except for a new address.
Discussion:
•
Finances Sasha suggested the new investment strategy would be 50 % in
conservative bonds, 40% in moderate growth, and 10 % in aggressive growth.
Bob: Maybe 10 percent is not a good idea, because we trust skills of
the investor. Bob suggests 50/50 split, with no management. Tabled till
Monday
•
On the issue of mailing journals to members –Bob Floden moved to
accept Sasha’s proposal to begin mailings on the date a new member
joins the Society, but continue for one year after membership lapses.
Motion passed
4. Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Education Rutledge Proposal – Sasha
apologized for failing to bring the actual text of the inquiry to the
Board, and explained that Rutledge wants to involve the Society in developing
their proposed Philosophy of Education Encyclopedia.
Bob Floden : The Society is not cut to support this kind of project.
Susan Laird: The field can redefined in a way we would not support, if
we do not act at all.
Decision: Continue discussion via e-mail, after Sasha forwards the original
proposal/inquiry to the Board.
5. Educational Theory and Yearbook Reports – Nick Burbules
Nick: Ed Theory. Shift to Blackwell was very successful. 20% increase
in subscriptions, 60,000 downloads a year, which is a tenfold increase.
Back issues continue to add to online archive. Ed Theory website will
be updated. More submissions are now coming from international authors.
We have opened new audiences, new markets internationally; not only England,
but also developing countries. We moved to OJS electronic submissions,
which provides better services to authors. We are establishing trial
relationship with AESA, which will increase the list of subscribers.
For now, they will become another sponsor; at the end of three years,
we both will evaluate the relationship, after which they may become a
permanent sponsor. This would increase a pool of our authors. AESA will
offer Ed Theory subscription as an option, so no duplicate subscriptions
will be offered.
Another initiative is forthcoming: an on-line community around the journals.
Diane Becket is retiring.
Yearbook: OJS is implemented for the publication cycle, but not for
reviewing. Nick recommends adopting OCS for the conference. OCS’s
downside – it is not being developed and updated. (Sasha added
that OCS does not handle on-line money transactions). We may consider
using either OJS or OCS for next conference.
This is time to think about the purposes of the Yearbook. It is primarily
a service to the members; it does not attract many readers. Do you want
to keep producing the hard copy? On the other side, PES Yearbook is a
refereed publication, not just a proceedings. This helps from the point
of view of tenure, promotion; it affects reputation. Perhaps the Society
should investigate how people actually use the Yearbook.
Another project is to digitize back issues. This would require significant
investment.
Debbie Kerdeman: looks like we have three choices: all-electronic, hard
back, paper back. Bob Floden: I move to ask Sasha to investigate the
cost of one-time digitization of the back issues of Yearbook. Motion
passed.
Kathleen Abowitz and Nick initiated “Connections” with UI Press., a new series of books on connection between philosophy and education, accessible, but serious.
Another issue: how does the Society build and promote the field? We have not been able to plan strategically for the field. Book series, position papers, etc. maybe helpful. Two things could be done: 1. Revitalizing COPA, so the Society always thinks about its role. We can charge COPA with developing a strategic plan of some sort. We have focused too much on jobs. We need to focus on the purpose of the Society besides organizing the conference. 2. Extending the term of the President would help with continuity, and allow to develop Society’s sustained efforts.
Debbie Kerdeman: should we try to incorporate the discussion on the
Society’s place and long-term prospects and purpose into the program.
Susan: This task may not be accomplished through a session at a conference.
We cultivate individualistic careerism; maybe it’s time to become
socially responsible.
Daniel: It is worth trying to explore in at least a couple of sessions.
Bob moved to ask Nick to develop a proposal for the next Monday. Debbie Kerdeman Seconded. Motion passed.
6. Committee Work and Reports
• Program Committee Report
Report from the Chair of the 2006 PES Program Committee, Daniel Vokey
Building the 2006 PES Program was a collaborative process from the very beginning, which was the selection of the members of the Program Committee. President Sharon Bailin and I drew up a list of people to invite to serve on the PC with a mind to representation of diverse points of view. Sharon handled communication with prospective members until the team was assembled. We opted for a larger than usual number of members due to the decision to invite papers in Spanish.
A total of 99 papers were received (four in Spanish) plus 21 alternative session proposals (two in Spanish). Of the twelve members of the Program Committee, ten received roughly an equal share of the English submissions; two of that ten received papers in Spanish; the two other members reviewed only Spanish submissions. I blind reviewed about a third of the highly ranked paper submissions and a few additional papers in cases where I only received two reviews or the reviews were greatly at odds. I also reviewed all of the proposals for alternative sessions.
I selected papers for the program prioritizing overall quality as judged by reviewer numerical ratings and comments. The importance of diversity of topics and traditions came into play only in a very few cases where papers on the borderline appeared to have equal merit (in terms of the criteria on the review form). I exercised judgment in cases where reviewers appeared to be either more sparing or more generous in their assessments than the Aaverage@ and in the few cases where there were wild disagreements; taking into consideration the backgrounds of the reviewers. In the end, 35 papers were selected included in the program, three as general sessions.
Based on the recommendations of the reviewers, I selected eight of the proposals for alternative sessions and created one other by combining submissions on a similar theme. Program space was reserved before and after the concurrent sessions for events sponsored by the Commission on Professional Affairs (COPA), Committee on the Status of Women in the Profession (COSW), the Jobs for Philosophers of Education Committee, and the Ethics SIG.
Respondents were selected from among (1) members of the Program Committee, (2) authors of rejected papers who were extended invitations, (3) PES members and others recommended by program committee members, (4) volunteers from the PES membership, and (5) people with recognized expertise in the relevant areas and so qualified to respond to the paper in question.
Chairs were selected primarily from among volunteers, including authors of rejected papers who were extended an invitation to serve as respondents or chairs. When I had exhausted the list of volunteers, I found likely candidates by “Googling” names on the list of conference registrants kindly supplied by the Executive Director Alexander Sidorkin.
The general guidelines and precedents I followed in assembling the program
included:
(1) accepting approximately 30 papers each year; (2) assigning three
reviewers to each paper, (3) including in both acceptance and rejection
letters the comments intended for the authors provided by the reviewers,
(4) not communicating numerical scores, which can be misleading, (5)
using a standardized evaluation form (sub-categories were useful), and
(5) exercising my judgment as Program Chair when deciding how long after
the deadline to accept late submissions.
Recommendations
Consider using OCS to speed up the process, save paper, and save costs of distributing papers for review.
Organize processing of submissions in a way that allows the Chair to
blind review papers if necessary.
Include in the call for papers information on how and when those submitting
proposals will receive confirmation that their submissions have been
received (a) to avoid premature requests for such confirmation and
(b) to signal to those submitting that, if they receive no such confirmation,
then their submission might have gone astray.
Post on the PES website the criteria on which papers and alternative session proposals will be assessed.
Decide whether or not people can submit more than one paper, and note this policy in writing on the PES website and in the Call for Papers.
Send out papers over the maximum word count (by up to but no more than 10%) only after receiving confirmation that the authors will revise the final version to meet limitations.
Include in acceptance letters reminders that maximum word limits must be observed in the final versions and that final versions should not be substantially different from the papers reviewed and accepted.
Clarify purpose and criteria for alternative sessions. At the moment this category of submissions appears to exist to serve a number of different purposes, not all of which are always compatible.
Advise reviewers whether or not their numerical scores will be used to calculate averages.
Acknowledgements
Barbara Applebaum submitted an excellent paper that was accepted for a general session. However, she withdrew her submission because, due to the conference beginning so soon after Passover, she was unable to find a way to travel to Mexico before the Sabbath.
Pedro Cortina is due special thanks for his exemplary service in his
role of Graduate Assistant to the Program Chair.
•
Election Committee Report: No report.
7. Old Business
•
Legacy Fund – Graduate Student Support. The item withdrawn by Sasha,
because the issue has been resolved in the last year’s meeting.
8. New Business
•
On-line registration proposal – Sasha
Bob moved to approve, with a condition that Sasha investigates the possibility
to use two different credit cards for dues and conference registration
fees. Susan Seconded, motion carried.
Meeting continues on Monday, April 24. Susan Laird is chairing.
•
Eliminate discount for paying by check
Passed.
•
Constitutional changes:
o Eliminate Council for Learned Societies reference.
Resolved: Susan will contact CSFE to clarify their role. Any Constitutional
changes will be proposed after that (change the references)
•
Change Bylaws, Article I.2:
That Committee shall confer immediately and, in accordance with the Constitutional
provisions for eligibility, select one nominee for the position of [the]
President-Elect and two nominees for each of the other places to be filled
in a given year.
Resolved: Include in the next cycle of constitutional changes, along
with the CSFE changes if any.
9. Transition from Sharon Bailin to Susan Laird
10. Approval of site, budget, Program Chair, and Program Committee
for 2007 conference. The budget is approved, with small corrections (add
AV cost, add grad students stipends).
Other issues and concerns
11. M. Katz will organize fundraising committee to increase the Legacy
Fund. Motion passed.
12. Wendy Kohli will organize festschrift for Jane Rolan Martin. Six
international people will come to talk about their own work, and how
Martin’s work influenced them. Debby expressed concern about six
people talking in one section. The concern is that people come and won’t
stay for the whole time. Susan: the precedent is the festschrift for
Israel Scheffler. Michael wonders if turnout will be good enough to do
justice to JRM. Wendy: Perhaps there is a way of doing two sections instead
of one, because people are used to 1.5-hour long sessions. There will
be more opportunities for the international guests to speak outside of
the main panel.
13. Barb Stengel: Instead of the alternative program, we will have the
evening program. Jeff Milligan will organize it. He will also connect
with the regional institutions. We have recurring complaint about newcomers
being excluded from social interactions. The evening time will be more
informal, and more inclusive.
14. Barb Stengel: John Covalesky will have the working papers program.
People will submit an abstract, and three people will get together informally
to discuss their work. Their names will be put on the program.
15. Discussion of Nick Burbules’s proposal. First part: Susan will
work with COPA to reactivate it. We will use COPA as the starting point
of the conversation. The Second part is about the three year Presidential
term. Susan will develop an alternative proposal to address the same
concerns without extending the actual presidential term.
16. Michael expressed a concern about the membership committee. The committee
is not active, and should have more stability and purpose.
17. Meeting adjourned at 9:15.
CONTACT: PES Executive Director Jeff Milligan
850-644-8171; milligan@coe.fsu.edu