2004-10-29: Fall 2004



Meeting of 29 October 2004

San Jose State University





Ted Anagnoson (LA), Chris Bettinger (San Francisco), Don Dixon (Sonoma), Mark Drayse (Fullerton), JeDon Emenhiser (Humboldt), John Korey (Pomona), Ted Lascher (Sacramento), David McCuan (Sonoma), Glenda Morgan (CO), Ed Nelson (Fresno), Andrew Roderick (San Francisco), Garry Rolison (San Marcos), Stephen Routh (Stanislaus), Pam Schram (San Bernardino), Richard Serpe (San Marcos), Rich Taketa (San Jose), Gene Turner (Northridge), Lori Weber (Chico).



1. Meeting called to order at 10:05 a.m.


2. Minutes of the Spring 2004 meeting approved as written.


3. ORs

If campuses have two reps, one should be designated as OR and the other as DR.


4. Databases


a. RT discussed changes in accessing databases – easy direct access through ICPSR.


b. Seventeen campuses have subscribed to the social science databases for 2004-05. JK noted that campuses have been overcharged for subscriptions, and suggested reducing charges for 2005-06 (rebates to be included in next year’s budget). There was discussion regarding the surplus: should it be used to defray the cost of next year’s subscriptions? Used to archive data?


c. RT stated that the council aggressively campaigned to obtain 2004-05 subcriptions. However, all access is IP authenticated with ICPSR, so faculty on non-subscribing campuses have access. RS stated that this is unethical. EN argued that the entire CSU system should have access, due to problems with annually shifting eligible campuses with ICPSR. JK said we should keep formal membership for all campuses, and shift IP addresses annually based on subscription. TA said that we shouldn’t penalize campuses for bad administration. RS said that newer, smaller campuses are at a disadvantage finding funds for subscriptions. GT stated that we should contact social science departments on non-subscribing camouses about their interest in ICPSR data.


Motion by JK to (1) allow non-subscribing campuses to keep accessing ICPSR databases, (2) hold workshops on non-subscribing campuses, and (3) inform non-subscribing camouses that their access will be moved next year unless subscription is paid (seconded by TA and passed unanimously).


d. The Cal poll index is only through 2002 – someone has been assigned to update it.


e. Our contract with Roper has been reinstated. This allows 50 data sets per year. For now, e-mail EN with study title to obtain Roper data set.


f. AR discussed archiving old datasets. He had talked with JK and GM about archiving old datasets at SFSU, in order to effectively manage and organize the data and make it readily available for faculty and students. JK said that AR’s IP would be recognized by Roper – faculty would order data through AR. JK stated that it is important to standardize access.


g. RT has its own ICPSR Direct Setup page. This needs to be updated by new ORs – submit a form to ICPSR.


5. Reimbursements


RT stated that the Council reimburses the costs of one meeting for all campuses. EN described the new reimbursement procedure: (1) Councils representatives are reimbursed by campuses, (2) CO invoiced by campuses.


6. Workshops


RT, JK, EN ran a very successful workshop at SJSU on 28 October. They involved the library and Center for Faculty Development. There were 18 participants. They recommend holding further workshops, titled “Introduction to Social Sciences Databases”, with the following format: (1) Using ICPSR Data/Website (60 mins.), (2) Using Field Data (20 mins.), (3) Using Roper Data (10 mins.) – short break – (4) Using Data – Issues, (5) Using Data for Teaching. The Powerpoint presentation will be put on the SSRIC website. They recommended using three presenters and having a standard evaluation form. JK suggested holding workshops involving clusters of campuses. Ideas for other workshops were discussed – e.g. SPSS.


7. Student Research Conference


a. This year’s student research conference will be held in Fresno on 28 April. Four panels will be held in the morning. The keynote speaker will be Jeri Echeverria, who will talk about “Basques in the Central Valley”. SSRIC faculty were encouraged to publicize the conference and solicit student papers.


b. LW states that she helps to publish an annual student journal at Chico. The winning presentations could be published in this journal.


c. PS said that we should encourage M.A. students to present their thesis results. EN noted that a 20-25 page paper needs to be submitted for the competition, instead of the whole thesis.


8. Field RFPs


EN discussed the perks of Field Poll membership: faculty can submit questions; a faculty fellow can submit twelve questions plus obtain a $12,000 stipend. RFPs need to be submitted by 15 January 2005; an SSRIC committee will make decisions before the February meeting.


9. ICPSR Summer Workshop Czar


a. The SSRIC allocates funds for travel to ICPSR workshops (2-3 week sessions).


b. TA agreed to be the ICPSR Summer Program Czar.


10. TRD Update


AR stated that it would be no problem to house the TRD website at SFSU.


Motion by JK to create a committee consisting of JK, Nan Chico, and a CSU Bakersfield SSRIC member to make necessary changes to the TRD website (seconded by TA and passed unamimously).


Motion by JK to allow the TRD committee to make arrangements with SFSU to redesign the TRD website (seconded by TL and passed unanimously).


11. Research Oriented Faculty E-mail List


EN will send out a revised list. AR will look into creating an automated list. RD stated that it would be helpful to have all new social science faculty included on the list.


12. Executive Committee


a. RT stated that the three-person committee appointed to deal with database switches during the summer – consisting of RT, JK, EN – has been great. The committee has also planned workshops and meetings, and dealt with budget issues over the summer. As the SSRIC has taken on more responsibilities, an executive committee is useful – especially over the summer.


b. RT suggested that it would be a good idea to maintain an executive committee, perhaps consisting of the current chair, past chair, and ‘chair apparent’. RD said that we shouldn’t be too formal about who should serve on the committee. JK suggested that we add a clause to the by-laws giving the Chair the option of creating an executive committee. JK suggested that we keep the ad hoc committee going year and discuss a proposal for creating an executive committee at the spring meeting.


Motion by JK to keep the ad hoc Executive Committee operating until the winter meeting (seconded by TA and passed unanimously).


13. Old Paper Codebooks


The ICPSR codebooks have been scanned. We need to scan the pre-1979 Field Poll codebooks. The UC is planning to do this. TL will look into the cost of digitizing old codebooks.


14. California Social Survey


a. TL discussed conducting a CSS to complement the General Social Survey (GSS). JK noted the GSS includes too few cases in California for effective analysis. RS stated that the CSS should be sponsored by the SSRIC and conducted by CSU shops. There was discussion about involving students in survey implementation and using the survey in classes.


b. An ad hoc committee was formed consisting of TL, LW, GR and MD to look into the CSS idea and report back at the winter meeting.


15. Instructional Materials


EN asked for teaching materials to include on the TRD website.



Meeting adjourned at 4 p.m.



Minutes submitted 20 January 2005

Minutes amended

Mark Drayse