- Teaching Resources
- The Council
2010-05-01: Spring 2010
SSRIC Spring 2010 Business Meeting Minutes – May 1, 2010
1. Student Research Conference
Winners of the three awards were:Grad: Andria Black –
Suggestion was made to limit sessions to 3 papers, if time is shorter than an hour and 15 minutes or so.
For future conferences, the suggestions were also made to make the criteria for the papers very clear, and to make it clear that the presentations themselves are more for practice, and that the awards are strictly based on the papers. Also, using some type of quantitative rubric, based on readability, etc.
Another suggestion is that we can email out any specialized papers, and perhaps read the papers a little bit sooner, to leave a couple days to seek a specialist’s opinion.
There is a need for defined criteria, in order to know which departments should be invited most rigorously, and who may not be as good a fit.
Campuses who had a lot of submissions offered some of the techniques that they used to solicit papers: these included (1) sending the email solicitation to the list for SPSS users…At Long Beach a lot of classes are doing poster sessions, etc. so the conference is in line with other efforts; sent out to all the Deans, and personally announced the conference at Deans/chairs meetings.
Question was raised about whether a letter is sent to students, thanking them for participating. Could develop a template for a letter for students who actually participated.
Jose mentioned: CAMPUS REP could also email students to find out where they heard about conference and then email the faculty to thank them!!
Question was raised about putting posters in call, and seeing whether there are submissions.
2. Consortium of Applied Social Science Research Centers (Ed)
Some of the Research Centers are experiencing difficulties staying open.
Ed gave an update on what is happening with the consortium.
The consortium now has a brochure, a roster, a list of resources for each center in the consortium, and plans to have a website sometime in 2010-11.
3. Field report (Ed)
There were two tied proposals based on the committee’s work. The proposals were discussed, it was determined that the reps from the campuses of the two involved faculty would not vote. After discussion, a unanimous vote yielded one proposal to award the faculty fellowship to. They will get 12 question credits, but the stipend and the additional 6 questions that have been given in the past will not be given. The Field Faculty Fellow for 2010-11 is Professor Kimberly Nalder (CSU Sacramento).
4. Summer program
Pat Jennings was the summer program “czar” and Ellen reported on her behalf that there was one faculty proposal and one graduate student who had expressed interest. Ellen said she would check back with Pat and find out if the faculty member’s proposal was adequate, in which case this proposal would be given preference in terms of having bigger pay off back to the CSU as a system.
5. Workshops –
Completed: seven workshops on five campuses (Bakersfield, Fresno, Fullerton, Humboldt, San Bernardino).
To be scheduled:
Northridge (Fall, TBA)
SLO (Data in classroom or databases)
Stanislaus (Fall, Databases and SPSS)
Ed and John are going to do a workshop on Elluminate in late September or early October, with a combination of databases and data in classroom.
Reps are encouraged to get experience running workshops so that there is a larger pool of people available to conduct workshops.
6. Budget for 2010-11 – Fees for Roper have gone up from $13,000 to $19,500
Budget was M/S/P
7. SSRIC meetings for 2010-2011 will, again be held for one day only (tentatively Fridays).
The planned sites for 10-11 are:
(tentatively early October):
(tentatively early February):
8. SSRIC Committees: The following members are the contacts for
Teaching Resources: Gene Turner
John Korey had a suggestion to be sure to address e-mails to make it clear whether they are being sent to just SSRIC reps, or being sent to campus long lists. One suggestion is to use the SSRIC template for the e-mail if it is going out to long lists, but not do that if is just going to reps. Another suggestion made at the meeting was to insert a note at the end of each email indicating to whom it was sent.
The issue of offering to provide reps with letters for their ARTP files was brought up. Ed will provide the template he used in 2006 to Ellen, and she will check with reps about the need for that.