The CCCC annual business meeting started off early this morning.
Malea Powell mentioned that the executive committee is examining several interesting new measures such as fully funding the research initiative and the possibility of electronic voting. CCCC continues to lose membership, but at a lower rate than other years, at about 4%.
Chris Anson announced that the twitter and blog feeds were “kind” to the conference. As well they should have been! Kudos to Malea Powell and Chris Anson and all for a great 2012 conference.
Kent Williamson announced that CCCC has a growth in spending. He specifically focused on the organization’s commitment to investing in technology at the conference for $80,000 this year; $83,000 for next year. $32,000 in support for contingent faculty for this year and $33,000 for next year (supports about 100 people).
The meeting then moved to a town meeting with discussions on CCCC Leadership Opportunities, CCCC and Diversity Issues, Increasing CCCC Membership and Open Feedback.
I sat at the “Open Feedback” table. Issues raised at the table included: having CCCC create more sessions/focus on attacks on higher education, issues of nimbleness in addressing addressing issues that come up in a timely way (e.g. Intellectual property), ways of educating members about how to get issues/ideas up through the official channels (responding to state/national legislation & public commentary comes up quickly and the structures of CCCC and NCTE is too difficult), support structures and resources are not always clear, representing issues of basic writing in CCCC and NCTE structure & issues, focus on how budget cuts affect contingent faculty, cuts in developmental programs, test scores limiting access to higher education, state mandates don’t recognize disciplinary knowledge.
The CCCC executive committee is working on a strategic plan to specifically address the nimbleness of the organization.
Karen Lunsford suggested a standing legislation committee that monitors and tracks federal legislation. Our table really liked this idea specifically because much of the legislation is happening state by state and we could look for patterns that are developing.
Our table also discussed the best ways to reach people. Our table endorsed the ideas of multiple platforms for easy access (same information cross-posted). We discussed the fact that the NCTE inbox is difficult to read & that few people access Connected Community. Instead, the traffic is on listservs, blogs, Google +, Twitter, and Facebook.
We were happy to hear about the move to update position statements regularly with updated research. Our table concurred that access to updated research on issues (like class size, assessment, etc.) is critical.
The group ended by talking about membership fees. We need a better structure for raising funds and making CCCC accessible to contingent faculty and others.
We then turned to the resolutions:
Two official resolutions of thanks and appreciation to Chris Anson, the 2012 program chair, and Vincent Casaregola and the Local Arrangements Committee, both passed by acclamation.
Resolution 3 to establish a Contingent Faculty Travel Fund funded by voluntary member contributions in consultation with the Labor Caucus and the Committee on Part-Time, Adjunct, and Contingent Labor carried (I think it was unanimous).
Following up on a sense of the house motion form last year, the group approved a motion to condemn the representations of American Indians and other racial and other ethnic groups or their names, cultures, and traditions as sports symbols, mascots, and team names. This was approved.
A resolution that “CCCC-sponsored journals will provide authors a non-exclusive right to place pre- and/or post-publication drafts of their published scholarly articles on the Internet; and
Will advocate for open-access publishing opportunities for other publishing venues…”
After discussion about the role of publication, open access, the scholarly community, the peer review process, this resolution was referred to the Executive Council for further discussion and consideration.
A proposal on plagiarism detection services was postponed until a later meeting.
There were two state of the house motions:
First: from the Status of Women in the Profession:
“We support women’s right to participate in public and policy discourse about their reproductive self-determination; and women should be free from being bullied, silenced, and shamed when advocating for themselves and others. We oppose the hostile rhetoric that has characterized the recent discourse about women’s reproductive lives.
This motion carried.
Second: the CBW Sense of the House motion thanking Chris Anson & Howard Tinbergen (see separate post). This motion passed (with a second from Kathleen Yancey! Yay!)
The Annual Business Meeting was a robust & exciting opportunity for discussion. The town hall meeting was excellent and provided a great forum for discussing issues important to higher ed, the field, and the organization. However, I was disappointed that more people didn’t attend. I hope that more people will put this on their agendas!