More about our agenda

Am following up on the discussions to set our agenda for this year.
It has taken me a while to get back to this task--while I have reasons, I shall refrain from listing them as excuses, eh.

A quick recap from your responses:

• Stephen C. suggested: could we consider authoring an AAG one page briefing sheet highlighting the key college-level skills that greatly boost employment opportunities in geography
• Dagmar B. favors: A panel discussion of the consequences of the NRC report for higher education geography programs, and adds that such a panel's mission would have to be very focused
• Michael G. noted: On the NRC report, my view is that we have a long, uphill battle as we are talking about “geographical sciences” or “geospatial technologies” as though the rest of the world accepted or understood these and suggested that perhaps the top-down NRC approach in this report could be contrasted with a bottom-up process.

Meanwhile, the AAG has issued the call for papers, with a deadline of October 20th.  (In the recent past, such deadlines have always been later extended, as I recall.)

So:

• Regarding Stephen's suggestion, I suppose it might be better to get a response from the organization's rep, Michael S.  If in case such a briefing-sheet or a comparable document already exists, then we might be better off not replicating that.  Or maybe we could fine-tune it, or update it ....
• Regarding the NRC report as a panel discussion item, I continue to have strong doubts:
• The ideas of the report might not have diffused through the community of academic- and practitioner-geographers, and waiting a year appeals to me.
• It is also highly likely that the AAG or some of its other committees might also be interested in discussing the NRC report at future meetings.  Again, Michael S. can brief us on this aspect.  We can then team up with those ventures.
• Perhaps, for starters, we could begin to talk about this, and listen in on conversations, at the upcoming regional meetings.  This way, we can also get a sense of any "ground-level" thinking on the NRC and thereby even identify and target colleagues who might be excited about the panel discussions we would like to organize.

That is where I am.  We have not heard from a couple of fellow-members ....

Michael G. and Jeff Y. had a couple of other observations about "geography" and "geographers," and the usage of "Geographical Sciences" in the NRC report.  I suppose this is a good time for a full-disclosure on my part: I have no degree in "Geography." (BTW, I hope I am not repeating myself on this point!)  As I wrote even in the AAG Newsletter, am absolutely convinced that there couldn't be a better academic home for me though :)

Let us know what you think, even as we wait to get updates from Michael S.

Agenda for 2010-2011

It has taken me a few more days than I had originally planned to get our discussions going.  Well, in the quarter system that I am in, we are just about getting close to the end of the summer session.  But then for those of you in the semester structure, I suppose your clock is rapidly winding down with respect to the beginning of a new academic year in August.  So, no better time than now, eh ...

Continuing from where we left off (I trust the new members have caught up with our past discussions; a reminder that it is all on the blog)

First, about one of the ideas we had explored, on liberal education and careers.  Michael had emailed in response that:

AAC&U has some interesting documents on the role of disciplines and relationships between LE and career preparation: http://www.aacu.org/resources/liberaleducation/index.cfm

Yes, indeed, the AACU has plenty of materials on the theme of liberal education/career-prep, though not explicitly about geography itself.  A couple of years ago, I recall a few presentations that addressed this, and they were all from the STEM disciplines.

More than that, on page 11 in the June AAG Newsletter, I came across an announcement about a forum on "Geography Careers in Business and Government."  The key questions and format outlined there are almost exactly the structure and content we had discussed over breakfast in DC.  However, this will not be at the AAG meetings in Seattle, but at:

the 2010 Applied Geography Conference in Fort Worth, Texas (October 20-23), to be chaired by Michael Solem and Janice Monk.

Given this, I am not in favor of duplicating the efforts and, instead, prefer to wait for a summary of the proceedings from Michael/AAG.  What do you folks say?

The other option we discussed at length was a panel discussion on how Geography programs view the significance of the recently published NRC report--on their respective curricula and what the report will mean in practical terms, and how we could measure then the difference between the NRC-influenced curriculum and its impacts on learning, versus the current curriculum.

The more I think about this option, the more excited I am in pursuing this.  However, I wonder whether we might be a tad premature in pursuing this in Seattle.  Because, there is a good chance that most faculty would not even have had a chance to peruse this document yet--it came out towards the end of the last academic year, which means that only in 2010-2011 will it gain any substantive review across campuses.
Thus, I am leaning towards scheduling this topic for the AAG meetings in 2012, which will be New York.

So, if I think both the items we had planned on are not quite feasible for the Seattle meetings, what do I have to propose?
We continue to deliberate on the NRC report, so that by the time this Committee meets in Seattle, we will have a fantastic sense of how to put together a session or two in 2012--related to the report.  Or, explore any other topic?

Let us know what you think.  And, yes, enjoy the rest of the summer :)

ps: perhaps you are already aware of the two geographers who are on an exciting adventure on the road, in the London-Tashkent rally ...

2010-2011 Membership

A big hello to the new and returning members of this Committee.

I was waiting for Patricia's email on the membership for the year, so that we might continue with the discussions from the AAG meetings last April.

Before we engage in serious talk, a quick note to the newcomers, Jill and Michael G.

• Last year, I set up a blog for this Committee, and a post there is automatically emailed to this Committee's members.  I will be delighted to add any of the interested members as co-bloggers there, if you are interested.  
• The blog is, for now, a neat way to recap the deliberations from last year.  The idea is that we will then be able to consistently move forward, without sliding back :)
• The simplest way to email the Committee is to address the email to aag-cgc@wou.edu

After the hotdogs and burgers over the weekend, maybe we can initiate the next round of discussions?
Once again, welcome.
(BTW, Jeff, your foot is all ok now?)

The Committee's members for 2010-2011 are:

Name	Institution	Year term expires	Comments
Phil Klein	U of Northern Colorado	2012	Member
Dagmar Budikova	Illinois State University	2012	Member-Council
Michael Solem	AAG	Indef.	Ex-Officio
Michael Gould	ESRI	2013	Member
Jill Coleman	Ball State University	2013	Member
Sriram Khé	Western Oregon University	2013	Chair
John Knox	University of Georgia	2011	Member
Jennifer Rahn	Samford University	2011	Member
Jeffrey Young	LizardTech	2012	Member
Steve Cunha	Humboldt State University	2012	Member

We have a plan .... for next year

First, it was a pleasure to meet and get to know at least a few fellow-members of this Committee.  The following were present at the breakfast meeting: Jeff Young, Ann Johnson, Phil Klein, Dagmar Budikova, and Sriram Khe.

Jeff Y. had a foot injury that rendered him immobile for the most part.  I hope he is better now, and did not need any surgery and the like ... 

Later I got an email from John Knox that he was at the restaurant at the scheduled time but could not locate us.  It would have been fantastic if John had been able to join us ...
Now that we have quite a jump on an agenda for the next year, I am sure we will be well organized before the next AAG meeting (in Seattle) and we will be able to preempt any possibility of such a case of metaphorical ships passing by on a foggy night. 

Over highly priced coffee, bagels, and grapefruit, our discussions quickly shaped up along the lines of a plan of action for next year. 
The idea was that perhaps we could sponsor and coordinate two sessions: one related to the recent report from the National Research Council (NRC), and the other about the the liberal education tradition of geography and/versus the career focus ... Let me explain

1. NRC Report:
Through a session--papers or panel--we could explore how geography programs are/will be responding to the report.  (The President's Column in the April newsletter is also about this report.)
Specifically, in terms of how they see the significance of the report on their respective curriculum and what the report will mean in practical terms, and how we could measure then the difference between the NRC-influenced curriculum and its impacts on learning, versus the current curriculum.

2. Liberal education and careers
A typical argument is that liberal education is not necessarily geared towards a particular professional career, but that the knowledge and skills will prepare the student for a productive career and lifelong learning.  And geography has been a wonderful example of such a liberal education tradition.  But, at the same time, students are increasingly emphasizing career options even when it comes to choosing a major.  So, can we then begin to clearly articulate "careers in geography" and "careers for geographers" and correspondingly understand the internal curricular implications, particularly at the four-year and community college levels?

Of course, there is common ground between the two broad areas.  But, we would as much as possible separate the discussions into two different sessions.

In order to understand these possibilities, we felt it will be helpful to find out how many students graduate every year with a major in geography.  But, we felt that perhaps such data has not been compiled. 

Micheal: any thoughts on this?

Phil and Ann offered to share with the Committee info that might be if interest and use to us: if I correctly recall--my notes are fuzzy here--Phil's comments were about international networking with respect to opportunities for student learning, and Ann's was in the context of a NSF report/study ...

Phil, Ann: Are my notes correct?  

Jeff Y. offered the services of teleconferencing through his employment, if the Committee decides that a few discussions on that mode will help.  From my first year on this Committee, I recall that the AAG also has a teleconferencing option. 

Michael: your comment on this?

Of course, when it comes to the sessions that we want to sponsor on these topics, we will coordinate even at the planning stages with other interested groups--such as, the Community College Affinity Group, ...

So, the task for all of us?

Jump in with your thoughts on how we might fine-tune the structure for the session(s) that we could put together for the next AAG meeting.

I think that is all I have from my notes. 
I am now regretting that we did not take a group photo :(  Maybe in Seattle, eh! 

Finally, at the meeting I mentioned that my term expires this June.  I received an email that I have re-appointed for a three-year term.  There are a couple of other members also whose terms expire this June, but I don't know whether they are continuing as well.  In any case, we will soon get an update from Michael or somebody else from the AAG on this.

For our meeting at DC

A couple of notes regarding our meeting at the AAG gathering, which is on Saturday, April 17th, at 7:30:

1. Where to meet?
It might be easier to get together at the restaurant right at the conference venue, at the Marriott. According to the hotel website, the restaurant that will be open for breakfast is Stone's Throw.  So, let us meet there.  (An obligatory bureaucratic footnote that the AAG will not pay for the breakfast.)

2. Our focus will primarily be on developing ideas for the Committee to pursue next year.  On that note, or perhaps even separately, we will also discuss a recent report that was published by the National Academy of Sciences.  This report is titled Understanding the Changing Planet: Strategic Directions for the Geographical Sciences.  The online access is not in the most easy-to-read format, at least for me, but it works.  Given that we want to figure out what we could do next year, and beyond, and given the scope of this Committee, this report will be of utmost interest to us.

The few members who won't be able to join us, yes, please provide us with your thoughts/comments through emails.  After the meeting, I will compile the ideas and share them with this Committee and we can collectively fine-tune them and appropriately shape an agenda for next year.

See you in St. Louis, er, DC :)

Zooming into a meeting time

Thanks for your replies, to the group and to me.

It appears that not many from our Committee will be at DC.  So, first a request to those who are not planning to attend the meetings: Will you please email me or the group any specific items you have in mind that you would want this Committee to follow-up on? 
Note that the items are not only for the rest of this year, but to also set the agenda for the next year or two.  Which means, even if your suggestions imply a longer time-horizon for discussions, well, all the better :)

Now, regarding the meeting time:
From Thursday morning until Saturday afternoon, there is only a very, very, narrow window of opportunity to get everybody together at the same time.  I haven't heard from our ex-officio member, Michael.  It will be neat if he can be present as well.

So, considering all the constraints, here are two options, both for Saturday, and we are looking at about 60 to 90 minutes of conversations:

• Option 1:
  We meet on Saturday morning, preferably a eat-and-talk meeting.  Will a 8:00 time be ok?  Let me know if 8:00 is ok, or if you prefer even earlier at 7:30.
• Option 2:
  We meet at lunch time on Saturday, about 12:00 or 12:30.

Once I hear from you, we will figure out the rest of the logistics.

Have a fantastic weekend

sriram

When to meet while at DC?

Hi everybody, the AAG has made available the preliminary program for the DC meeting.

There is a chance that you are not attending the annual meeting; I have emails from two members on this note.

For those attending, it is highly possible that your schedule there will be like mine, in that we will not be there from early Wednesday until late Sunday. 

So, assuming that Thursday, Friday and Saturday will be when we might have the greatest overlap, please send me/us a note with the following info, if you are planning to attend the meeting:

• Your three preferred time slots--about 60 to 90 minutes--for us to get together.  And make sure the listing reflects the higher preference first.  You may also give us a blank check of sorts--like, anytime on Friday.
• If you have any preference for a meeting-only, or a meeting @ some eating time (breakfast meeting, meeting at lunch time, .... )
  
• Any particular item you would like to include in the agenda for that meeting.

sriram