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.
