23:4 (2008:12) Committee Update: PPC

December 19, 2008 at 12:31 am | Posted in Program Planning | Leave a comment

[Ed. note: Excerpt from the committee report for the September Executive Board meeting.]


Morag Boyd and Erika Ripley, Co-Chairs
September 2008


1) Speaker accountability database
The 2007/2008 PPC members were asked to provide any feedback about speakers from the 2008 conference. This information will be added to the existing details, and saved for future reference by PPC co-chairs as needed.

2) E&A Report
The co-chairs examined the conference evaluations for the 2008 conference for suggestions. In particular, we pulled out suggestions for vision speakers. We also looked closely at comments about the non-repeating format and for any themes of particular interest for the membership. Selected portions of the executive summary were also shared with the PPC members.

Please note that the earlier board meeting means that we do not have as complete a draft schedule or as many details about programming as have been available at the Fall board meeting in past years. We have been and will continue to work with our Board Liaison as additional components come together.

3) Theme for 2009 Conference
Following the Phoenix conference, we solicited input from the PPC members and worked with CPC to propose themes for the 2009 conference in Asheville NC. “Riding the Rapids through a Mountain of Change” was selected.

4) Call for Proposals
The call for proposals was distributed on Friday, August 1 to all individuals in the NASIG database and all lists and individuals noted in the Publicist Manual, with the addition of the CONSER lists. A reminder was sent to the NASIG membership and Serialst on August 28.

5) Responses to Call for Proposals
The co-chairs have developed a system for confirmation of proposal receipt with an email that reiterates the timeline for review. As of September 2, we have only received 4 program proposals. Committee members were asked to encourage colleagues to submit programs. We have had several email inquires, so we are hopeful a few more proposals will come in.  We are not sure why we have seen a low response rate.  Possible factors may be travel budgets at the institutions of potential proposers, lack of information about reimbursement or that the timeline for acceptance may be disheartening. In addition, the Electronic Resources and Libraries Call for Proposals was issued on August 18, 2008.

6) Plans for Second Call
The second call will be critical, so we welcome any input from the board on program themes or recruitment ideas. Historically, more proposals have been received from the second call, so we continue to hope for good pool of proposals. We expect to issue the second call around September 22, with a closing date of October 31. Allowing a few weeks to review proposals and contact speakers we would like to make adjustments to their proposals, we plan to have the program slated for board approval by the end of November.

6) Conference Schedule
We are not suggesting any major changes in the schedule from the 2008 conference.

We are currently holding a no-conflict time for Society for Scholarly Publishing discussion groups. Jill Emery will be working with SSP in the fall to plan these sessions.

We recommend staying with the non-repeating format for programs. The conference evaluation responses were fairly even distributed over the three responses with 34.7% favor no-repeat, 37% neutral or uncertain, and 28.3% wanting to return to repeating format. Comments on this topic ranged from strong support of no-repeat to strong desire to have repeating sessions. Some comments suggested repeating popular sessions only. The most common reason in the comments for wanting repeating sessions was being unable to attend all sessions of interest. Because there are typically 5-6 sessions in each slot, it is unlikely that people would be able to attend all programs of interest, even if they did repeat. By not repeating sessions we can offer more total programs, and therefore hopefully meet more people’s interests. Furthermore, the non-repeat format allows us more flexibility in the schedule for no-conflict times for special programs or to add hot-topic sessions closer to the conference date and to allow the program to start a little later in the day. If the board supports the non-repeat format, PPC will pay more attention to distributing programs on similar themes, such as electronic resource management, across different time slots.

We have also included proposed times for a Brainstorming session as well as time for attendees to meet the NASIG Board members. As these events are sponsored and organized by the board, we will adjust however is needed.

7) Vision Speakers and Preconference
The committee is currently discussing vision speaker and preconference ideas.


Leave a Comment »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: