By: Mary Lynch

Mary Lynch — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 18:04:30 +0000

Gary, you make a good point here – quick posting of drafts and transparency allows for reaction and input and widespread “thinking” before a final proposal is issued. As long as the Committee responds to the CONSIDERABLE comments and input it has received, then that process of posting drafts rather than no posting about internal discussions is a good one. Let’s see what the conversation is like this weekend.

By: Gary H. Palm

Gary H. Palm — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:41:06 +0000

All.
I do want to raise a note of caution about making a lot about the posting of working drafts. The issue of transparency has been a special concern of mine and I have persistently urged more openness. I have been especially pleased by Don Polden’s using the Section’s website to post everything whether in working early stages or as the drafts change including the comments that were all prevously not available. I would much rather have the Section post too early than wait until everything is polished to a scholarly perfection. I think on many issues but probably not this one, we have a much better Likelihood at getting our changes seriously considered at the earlier stage. I hope that in our outrage at Don over his work product, we can acknowledge the good practice of more openness that he has started. Neither the Consultant’s Office, the Council or any other committee has been as open.
Gary

Comments on: MORE PROPOSED REVISIONS: FACULTY RESPONSIBILITIES EMPHASIZES TEACHING, ASSESSMENT, & INDIVIDUAL MISSION

By: Mary Lynch

By: Gary H. Palm