Child pages
  • 7-23-2008 Conference Call
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Participants:  Josh, Sue, Kate, Maggie, Janet, Joan, Mary

Agenda Items

1. TWSIA 2009

  •  Have we looked at other ways to increase submissions? 
    • Contact teaching and learning centers (Kate)
    • Launch at Virginia Tech Conference - have a session, have winners present either in person or via web-conference or other
  • Sue - Email lists for volunteers for the committee
  • Josh - Use newsletter to alert people as to committee
  • Sue - Starting responsibilities: identify judges, developing a review process, identifying funding/sponsorship
  • Janet - Who has connections? would be willing to make a call, ask for sponsorship? What are the categories and costs?
  • Sue - Should put together some documentation as to the media that was gained from this before, what would the sponsor gain?
  • Josh - Need a sponsorship plan. He will get together the materials generated from the last contest.
  • Joan - Should identify cost for getting people there and how the sponsorship funds would be used for that--how many levels of people we would pay to attend
  • Joan - More sponsorships we can get and more awards we can get out there, the more participation in the conference would occur
  • Josh - As suggested last week, have subject-related tracks for the award to allow faculty to count their award and presentation toward tenure and promotion
  • Joan - Could there be some breakdown as to the degree of participation? For example: beginners don't need to have such a degree of sophistication to compete.
  • Janet - The committee has some work to do in how to use the award. A trip to Boston is not going to be as sexy as a trip to Paris. So, should there be a stipend. Other levels perhaps just have their conference fee waved. Sue agreed. Maggie said that the faculty ha she worked with entered the contest not just for the trip to Paris, but for recognition of excellent teaching practices.
  • Maggie - Concern about watering down the award with too many "winners."  Though she wants to encourage more faculty to apply and participate, we don't want to have a situation where everyone or most of the applicants get an award.
  • Sue - Agreeing with Maggie, suggests breaking it into categories of subject matter as opposed to categories of teaching levels. She believes the rubric is designed for all levels.
  • Joan - Does not want to compromise the outcome of excellence, just wants to recognize the issues of different types of teaching (i.e., High School vs Graduate School students)
  • Sue - Would like to get levels of sponsorship down so that she can make her call today with more information. Would like to have everyone decided about the rubric by next week, August 1st.
  • Kate - Need to have Nate fix site so that line breaks are present in final.

Two tasks the committee needs to focus on prior to the Virginia Tech conference: Sponsorship and What Types of Awards so we can put something together to launch at conference.

Reiterate immediate responsibilities:

  • Josh will put together initial sponsorship plan documents and put up on confluence for comments.
  • Sue will send out email to lists for recruiting more committee members and reference the OpenEd Practices site for review.
  • Everyone should review the award site and see if it works, and do we want to change anything?
  • Everyone should take a look at the rubric and see if we want to use that again or do we have any changes?

Goals for next weeks call, July 30th:

  • Look at sponsorship plan
  • Work on award process
  • Present work for finalizing at August 6th call

2. Connections to Conference Call

  • Look at other options for connecting from overseas. VOIP.  Josh will look into capabilities of I-link to do that. Maggie volunteered to use her Adobe Connect system which does allow that.