June 25-26, 2006
Attending: John Anderson, Greg Bernhardt, Ada Beth Cutler, Van Dempsey, Vern Henshaw, Carol Wilson, Nick Michelli, Ann Foster.
Attending the strategic planning meeting preceding this session: Dianne Bath, Ron Cambra, Marisa Bier, Juan Guerra, Dick Clark, John Goodlad for part of the day, the executive board, and facilitator Stephen McCormick.
The strategic planning group, charged by the NNER governing council to develop a plan for the NNER’s future, agreed to the following actions. The executive board responsibilies based on the agreements follow:
The group reached consensus on a number of points and brainstormed regarding many others. The basic agreements, as recorded by Stephen McCormick were:
- We will recommend to council the establishment of NNER as independent legal entity.
- We anticipate that NNER will continue to work closely with IEI as partner.
- We anticipate that there would be a transition period to the time when NNER was fiscally self-sufficient.
Action:
The timeline established at the end of the strategic planning session for follow-up by the executive board was:
- Greg and Ann draft an outline of the plan and distribute to the strategic planning team (by July 7)
- Research legal opinions (Ann with input from Greg and Dick)
- Full draft prepared and shared with strategic planning group
- Get agreement from strategic planning group (By week of Aug 25 – Sept 1)
- Notify council members (By end of Sept.)
- Prepare presentation materials for action in October at NNER annual conference at which time there will be a motion to recommend to council the establishment of NNER as independent legal entity with amendments to the NNER governance document as required to implement this decision.
Executive Board Meeting discussion on equity question
Ada Beth Cutler shared copies of an Op Ed that took a stand against a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage written by a BYU adjunct faculty member and a newspaper article about the firing of this faculty member for writing the Op Ed piece. She shared her grave concern about BYU’s action and policies that discriminate against homosexuals, given the principles of the Agenda for Education in a Democracy. She asked for discussion on the implications for the NNER and the mission of access and inclusion. Vern Henshaw responded, noting that he was reflecting only his perspective, not representing the larger partnership. He noted that the BYU partnership governing board does not have the authority to change policies at BYU, that the decision and policies do not reflect the actions at the partnership level. He indicated that the partnership co exists with the BYU policies and includes not only BYU but also public school districts that are not bound by the BYU policies.
Equity Task Force
The board reviewed the equity task force work and deliberated over the following comments made by board members:
Feasibility: Is using a continuum the best way to address the areas?
Do the categories indicate that a setting is further along than others?
Is it unwieldy?
“No Action” was questioned, why is this needed?
“No Action” could be the catalyst to take action in the area, might result in addressing areas that people are not aware of, or could indicate that the area is not of priority at this point in time.
Can settings really do this work?
What is the appropriate level of measurement?
Vern Henshaw noted that public education institutions cannot discriminate in policy or practice, therefore we need to ask at what level we should look at these areas. The follow-up discussion focused on the difference between compliance with laws and policies and attention to more specific local practices that may be barriers to access for all or that do not support a nurturing environment for all. Examples included bullying on play grounds, social isolation of groups, marginalizing individuals or groups in day-to-day interactions.
How do we filter this?
Do we need to add an area that indicates that this is a challenge, even if we are making progress?
Executive board agreement:
- Pilot this now with a select number of volunteer settings. This also supports the tripartite council recommendation from last year’s meeting to begin to take action on the equity report from 2003.
- Ask the following settings to pilot this process as they were represented on the equity task force;
- BYU Partnership, Montclair, South Carolina, Southern Maine. Get advice from them after they have gone through the process.
- Contact Ada Beth Cutler, Steven Baugh, Betty Lou Whitford, Pat Graham (Note Ada Beth has agreed, Vern has agreed to talk with Steven Baugh about participating in the pilot.)
- Pilots will be completed in late September.
- Set up a video conference from Montclair for the reviewers (Ada Beth is the contact for this.)
- The pilot would constitute the settings’ annual report.
- In addition, the executive board accepted the equity task force report as a pilot, and supports distributing it to the governing council as a work in progress.
- If others would like to pilot this, that would provide additional information.
- Ask Equity Task Force to be the review committee before the annual conference.
- Tripartite Council role; have representatives from the settings that piloted this give updates on the process.
Action: Ann will contact the selected setting contacts (settings represented at the equity session) and the equity task force members. Ada Beth and Vern will follow-up in their settings.
Follow-up discussion on the specific question raised regarding the firing of the faculty member at BYU.
There was discussion regarding a letter to be sent to the BYU Public School Partnership setting contact asking for feedback on the articles that appeared in the newspaper. This idea was later rejected in favor of a phone call from the executive board chair to allow for a less formal and more collegial conversation. Observations and discussion by board members regarding potential action that may be taken included the following:
Vern Henshaw noted that a letter was a formal and one way communication channel and asked what the intent of the letter is; that is what purpose is it intended to serve for the NNER and for BYU, and would it take into account the broader partnership members? He noted that the BYU and church policies will not be changed by such a correspondence and the local partnership cannot respond to church policy.
Other questions and topics raised by the executive board members follow:
- Are we setting a precedent to have each setting respond to and be accountable for media coverage that is not in concert with the NNER principles?
It was also noted that this issue is not about media coverage but about a specific action that in contrary to the NNER principles.
What is the role of the executive board? Should this first be an action of the Governing Council that the EB might implement if directed to do so? If so, there needs to be conversation at the Governing Council to clarify the roles of the GC and the position of the NNER in terms of sanctions and/or growth and dialogue that leads to change.
If this is a unique situation, it needs to be addressed as such with thought given to how to seek the best solution to the specific issue.
What would we expect as the outcome of our action?
The board discussed the need for dialogue with the intent of increased understanding of the partnership possibilities that will promote change. The board also noted the need for a balance between dialogue and action, one purpose for the dialogue is action and that the action must be both appropriate and promote positive change and growth in concert with renewal, continually getting better at issues of access and inclusion.
Action: Greg Bernhardt will call Steven Baugh.
California State Chico Application
Reviewed by Mary Ellen Finch and colleagues at Metropolitan Consortium, John Anderson in conjunction with NeNER.
Action: Ann Foster will contact Bonnie Konopak to let her know that another setting in her state is applying for membership. Executive Board then recommended approval of this new setting and that an electronic ballot to the GC be distributed through google group.
Tripartite Council Election
Leroy Kemp has resigned from the tripartite council chair position, noting difficulties in attending to the work in light of his role and personal responsibilities, therefore his seat on the executive board is vacant. It was suggested that the current chairs examine possible election processes to ensure that people nominated for the leadership have reflective time to determine if the role is a good fit for their schedules and priorities, that they have clear understanding of the scope of responsibilities included in the role, and that they can commit to the responsibilities including time and preparation. It was recommended that the tripartite groups set aside ample time for the election process. The current school and A&S chairs will complete their terms in October .
The tripartite chairs nominated Nick Michelli to complete the COE tripartite chair term to ensure that there is continuity in the leadership and processes for the next meeting. Nick has participated in the strategic planning session that will guide much of the NNER’s future work and the tripartite council’s deliberation. The executive board approved the nomination.
Action: tripartite chairs will work to ensure that possible nominations for the incoming chairs (School and A&S) have an opportunity for deliberation to consider this role. The three chairs will plan the conference TC meeting.
Budget Discussion
The proposed budget was modified by Greg Bernhardt and Dick Clark to include a raise for the executive director that would address two issues that arose last year; first to make the salary change congruent with the IEI fiscal year to avoid the accounting work needed to make the raise retroactive, and to ensure agreement between the NNER and IEI prior to suggesting a change in salary.
The modified budget is included in the minutes.
In addition the board requested that the salary line include the FTE for both the executive director and the office support staff. It was also asked if the classification of the office staff as secretarial/accounting staff was used because it fits a particular category of salary at the university for the base-lining the salary range.
The board asked that the category of executive director travel be amended to read executive director travel and operation expenses to allow the executive director to conduct day-to-day business.
Action: The budget proposed by the executive board will be discussed and acted upon by the GC.
Action: It was proposed by Greg Bernhardt that the governing council be polled electronically to approve the executive director’s salary and benefits portion of the budget to make the raise effective 9/1/06. This is at the specific request of the IEI to make the two start dates for the .50 FTE portions of the executive director’s salary parallel and administratively starting at the same time. With this approval, the IEI would be saved a significant amount of time and effort and would be greatly appreciated. The executive board approved this action.
The board approved use of funds from the NNER reserve for any attorney expenses that may occur in relation to exploring the 501(c)3 status.
2006 Conference
Greg Bernhardt updated the group. There have been 84 proposals submitted with a fairly even distribution among the five strands. The review process has begun and those submitting a proposal will be notified by mid summer. Space will be provided for the tripartite meeting, the League of Small Democratic Schools, Governing Council, New Comers session and A & S E Journal discussion.
2007 Conference Update
Van Dempsey noted that the West Virginia Benedum collaborative will proceed with plans for hosting the conference even though he is transitioning to a new university. The group is planning to work with Bruce Field and Bryan Burgan, details have not been confirmed yet. The planning committee is considering hosting the conference in Charleston with dates to be announced.
Conference planning for 2008-2009 was discussed. Volunteer hosts in the mid or far west would be appreciated. The EB would like to see the annual conference move geographically to the west in 08.
Action: Greg and Ann will contact setting leaders who have expressed interest.
Other
The NNER governing council and open meeting need to be put on the AACTE schedule. There needs to be discussion about the appropriateness of this meeting for the NNER meeting given the expanded governing council and the low attendance.
McGraw Hill-Nick noted that the higher education division of McGraw Hill is supportive of our mission and does take a different position from other divisions of the publishing company. There is a proposal for the NNER conference to address this and other paradoxes related to the NNER work.
Ann Foster will continue to work on advancing the communications plan following strategic planning agreements.
[Print Window] [Close Window] |