Minutes 2007

MINUTES OF THE ISPME 7 BUSINESS MEETING

June 9, 2007, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, CANADA

Thirty-three (33) delegates were in attendance at the meeting, which began at 9:45 am and was chaired by Paul Woodford. Attendees are listed as follows: Paul Woodford (Canada), Iris Yob (USA), Deanne Bogdan (Canada), Charlene Morton (Canada), David Carr (UK), Randall Allsup (USA), Betty Ann Younker (USA), Marja Heimonen (Finland), Heidi Westerlund (Finland), Werner Jank (Germany), Oivind Varkoy (Norway), Frede. V. Nielsen (Denmark), Anthony J. Palmer (USA), Estelle Jorgensen (USA), Susan Quindag (USA), J.Terry Gates (guest, USA), Nico Schuler (USA), Mark Whale (Canada), Steve Zdzinski (USA), Frederick Pio (Denmark), Mary Bickel (guest, USA), David Stevenson (USA), Ann Stokes (USA), Joseph Abramo (USA), Melissa Natale Abramo (USA), Teresa Lesiuk (USA), Mary Reichling (USA), Ketil Thorgersen (Sweden), Cathy Benedict (USA), Patrick Schmidt (USA), Felicity Laurence (UK), Sidsel Karlsen (Sweden) Greg Lindahl (USA).

1. Introduction of the Agenda/Names of the Current Executive Committee

1.1 Copies of the agenda were handed out to those attending. Chair Paul Woodford convened the meeting, thanked the members of the Conference Committee, especially Charlene Morton for her valuable assistance. He informed us that since Hermann Kaiser’s wife had become ill during the course of the past two years, Charlene was the de facto Conference Co-Chair.

1.2 Paul put up on the screen the slate of elected officers the current Executive Committee as follows:

Co-Chairs: Paul Woodford (Canada) and Hermann Kaiser (Germany)
Program Chair: Charlene Morton (Canada)
Associate Program Chair: Oivind Varkoy (Norway)
Recording Secretary : Deanne Bogdan (Canada)
Treasurer: Randall Allsup (USA)

2. Minutes

2.1 Terry Gates made a motion that the Minutes be passed as read; seconder was Betty Ann Younker.

3. Business Arising

3.1 Notices Regarding Elections

Paul put forward a written motion to amend the by-law regarding elections that had been approved at the Hamburg meeting. He stated that, as it stands, the by-law requires three months advance notice of a call for elections, and that nominations be made within approximately 30 days after the designated date. Paul proposed that the clause, “Where feasible” precede the wording of the by-law, and that a final sentence be added to the by-law, reading, “If necessary, a slate can be formed at the Symposium meeting and be voted on by the membership present.” The motion was seconded by Iris Yob. During the discussion Frede Nielsen, Estelle Jorgensen, and Paul suggested that the final sentence be stricken from the amendment while retaining the “[w]here feasible” clause. Ann Stokes proposed the time-line be changed to “two months.” Charlene iterated that the intent is to have the election process completed in advance of the meeting. Estelle suggested that the “[w]here feasible” clause on its own leant the required ambiguity to the motion.
The motion was passed. The by-law now reads as follows:

Elections: Where feasible, approximately three months prior to a meeting of a scheduled Symposium, a call for nominations will be sent to members in good standing via the internet with instruction to make nominations within approximately 30 days from the designated date of the notification. From that list and with additional names added by the EC, a slate of officers will be evaluated and selections made by the EC. The proposed slate of officers for the next Symposia period will be sent to the membership with appropriate information on each person’s qualifications. A vote will be requested within a four-week period prior to the scheduled Symposium so that the new slate can be named at the Symposium and appropriate meetings held with outgoing and incoming officers. A simple majority will be acceptable for all elective offices.

4. News

4.1. Venues and Dates of the Next Two Meetings

Paul informed the group that the next meeting in 2007 will be held at the Sibelius Academy of Music in Helsinki, and the for a variety of reasons the 2011 Symposium was changed from Michigan State to New York University, New York City. Cathy Benedict, the site host of the 2011 meeting spoke as follows to the amenities of the New York location:

*There is a conference team ready to go towards beginning work on the conference.
*NYU has a conference office that will draw up the budget, attend to availability of space for the meetings, and send out all mailings.
*Accommodation would be left to individual attendees.

Heidi Westerlund, Co-Chair of the 2009 meeting, described The Sibelius Academy of Music as one of the largest music schools in Europe, and located in downtown Helsinki. There are good hotels are close to the conference site. Heidi is attempting to raise money for side-trips to SIbelius’s house, outside the city proper. Paul raised the issue of fundraising for possible keynote speakers. Heidi indicated her desire to secure a speaker from Africa.

4.2 Transportation

Cathy spoke to the proximity of the Kennedy and Newark, New Jersey airports to NYU, the relative ease of taking public transport to the conference site and the fact the taxis are relatively inexpensive.

4.3 Time of Year for Meetings

Heidi said that from her perspective, June would be a propitious month for the meeting, but that August would also be good, as Helsinki hosts an Arts Festival in August. Frede said that August would be impossible for some and asked the group to establish a traditional time of year for future Symposia. Paul suggested that the new Executive poll the members via email for their preferences. Teresa Lesiuk noted that her academic year begins August 16th, and Nico Schuler reminded us that some delegates would be teaching summer school in June. Charlene reminded us that the cost of transatlantic flights should be taken into account, given that prices rise as of July 1st. Teresa asked about the weather in Helsinki in June and was told by Heidi that it is much like London, Ontario. Paul said that the final dates should be left to the new Executive, but that it appeared that June would be the preferred month for future meetings.

5. Budget

5.1 Preliminary Financial Report

Paul showed a breakdown of the conference budget on the overhead screen. He said that he tried as best he could to minimize expenses and keep the registration fee to a minimum. The total cost of the conference was $3,397.00 CND. Treasurer Randall Allsup reported that there is a total of $ 1,171.00 USD currently in our account.

5.2 Charitable Status of ISPME

A discussion ensued regarding whether ISPME has the status of a non-profit organization. Randall said that we are currently a non-profit organization though, according to Estelle, we have not legally applied to be a charitable organization. Terry said that it is just as easy to establish a Secretariat through a university. Here a distinct advantage would be the possibility of electronic payment. Paul indicated that he wasn’t able to do it but that Heidi and Cathy could for the next two conferences. Terry advised that going through a university would obviate hidden costs in future. Estelle concluded the discussion by suggesting that ISPME seek charitable organization status through Indiana University, adding that following that route would require our submitting a considerable amount of documentation.

6. Discussion of Duration of Future Symposia and Time/Format of Papers

6.1 Paul noted that there is cadre of regular conference attendees and that the conference should try to accommodate as much as possible opportunities for them to present.

6.2 Duration of the Conference

Werner Jank stated that three days was a good time-span for the conference and that a two-day meeting is too short. Paul said four days was too long. Nico noted that in order to accommodate those who have to take time off from teaching, it might be better to move to a Thursday to Saturday format rather than Wednesday to Friday as it now stands. Werner disagreed, saying that for those who cross the Atlantic, there would not be enough time to prepare for returning to work. Heidi noted that traveling on Sunday is less costly than on Saturday.

6.3 Time Slot/Format

A lengthy discussion ensued about several issues relating to this topic. Mary Reichling suggested that having two respondents per paper would afford more people the opportunity to appear on the program. Randall proposed that there be more concurrent sessions and noted that presenters spend a long time crafting a paper and that it is disappointing to then have to cut it considerably for presentation. Deanne Bogdan cautioned against holding more than two concurrent sessions at any one time.

Tony Palmer wanted diversification in the format, as listening to one paper after another strains the attention span of the audience. He suggested that the paper sessions be broken up by panel discussions or other formats with a shorter length, and that people could sign up in advance regarding their preferred format. He stressed the need for presenters to practice their papers (papers are a kind of performance) and that power point should be used as an audience guide, which is not to be read from but rather referred to by the speaker. Presenters should learn to “pitch” the main ideas to the audience.

Paul noted that the half-hour breaks and the 90-minute lunch break seemed to work well for this conference. Werner observed that only a few people had kept to their time limit, and suggested that all presenters have a printed paper for the audience to read during the presentation. He added that optimally all papers be pre-read prior to the conference. Cathy suggested the people keep in mind that slowing down to read a paper doubles the delivery time, and that the audience, rather than being glued to the printed paper during the presentation, should honor the speaker by looking at him/her. Ann said that all attendees should have copies of papers they could not attend. Frede noted that the handling of time slots at this conference exceeded that at most conferences he attends.
Ketil Thorgersen reinforced the need to see the papers in advance. Patrick Schmidt suggested that the presentation formats could be more interactive in ways that would bring more people together in responding to those other than the main speaker and official respondents. David Carr introduced the issue of inclusivity, wondering who is being turned away. He also mentioned the idea of two-paper sessions. Iris noted that we need more presentation time, not less, suggesting that a 90-minute slot would afford more dialogue between presenters and audience. Mary thought that the review process should advise authors if a paper is too long.

Tony shifted the discussion away from the papers proper, emphasizing the need for various forms of presentation formats such as roundtable discussions. Steve Zdzinski noted the prevalence of non-philosophers teaching courses in the philosophy of music education in the US, and pointed out the need for some “How To” presentations. Terry suggested a word limit of 3000 to 3500 words. Frede offered a variation on this theme, saying that he wrote a 7-page paper for a 30-minute time slot while others were as long as 33 pages. David commented that 4,000 words was the limit for papers read at the Philosophy of Education conferences, suggesting that the paper could be presented in précis form rather than read. Felicity Laurence focused on the number of words that could actually be spoken, not written, in a particular time-slot. Frede then shifted to the topic of conference themes. Paul suggested a combination of open sessions and themed papers. The discussion concluded by introducing the topic of the next section, translation into other languages as way of reaching across cultures.

6.4 Translation

Paul invited Estelle to address item #7 on the Agenda,

“Discussion re possibility of international translation/publication service by Indiana University Press.”

Estelle, seconded by Tony, spoke to the following motion, put forward by Estelle, Frede, Mary, and Werner:

We move for the ISPME to authorize a task force to investigate the possibility of establishing a series of published translations of works in the philosophy of music education into several of the main language groups (e.g. English, German, Spanish, French, Japanese, and Chinese), and report to the ISME meeting in Helsinki.

Discussion proceeded as follows: Estelle pointed out that her privileged relationship with IUP afforded her easy access to electronic publishing. She would like to approach IUP to set ups a series of translations of work in the philosophy of music education into several languages, which would open up many possibilities for increased communication across cultures in the field. She added that normally university presses are not interested in translation projects, but that that could change were the series to be published electronically. Were more people to have the opportunity to read selected papers thus published, this wider dissemination would greatly benefit the field. Estelle asked members to give her and her fellow proposers time to investigate this initiative. To this end she asked for a small group to work together, especially those with bilingual expertise, several of whom were not able to be present at this meeting.

To Tony’s request for further clarification of Estelle’s proposal, Frede emphasized the importance of reconsidering the aims of the Society as an international association, in which knowing the literature across cultures was key. He continued by stressing that electronic publishing would encourage new writings. Admitting the difficulties of undertaking such an enterprise, he said the risk was worth taking. Werner supported the idea by stating that at present we have to evaluate the papers from other countries virtually devoid of background knowledge about their genesis, influence, and so on; thus a translation series could only enhance the Society’s efficacy. Betty Ann added that the initiative could only deepen our discussions. Paul underlined the importance of increasing the international nature of ISPME’s leadership.

The motion was passed.

Estelle said that she would provide a list of names to the EC, which would make recommendations. Werner promised to contact German journals that would publish some of the papers heard at this conference and encouraged others to do the same in their countries, especially Canada.

7. Invitation from ISME for ISPME to Mount a Mini-conference.

7.1 Paul reported briefly on the invitation by ISME for ISPME to mount a mini-conference at the next ISME conference to be held in July, 2008, in Bologna. He stated that the outcome of the discussion on the topic at this meeting was that we would submit a list of questions to ISME to be presented by several of our members at the Bologna meeting.

8. Elections

8.1 The Executive Committee proposed a slate of officers to be voted on as follows:

Co-Chairs: Heidi Westerlund and Randall Allsup
Program Chair: Frederick Pio and Werner Jank
Treasurer: Patrick Schmidt
Recording Secretary: Liz Gould

Paul asked the members if there were any more nominations to be added to the list. None were forthcoming. Tony moved and David Stevenson seconded that the slate be acclaimed. Estelle called for a round of applause in gratitude to Paul and Charlene for hosting such a successful and enjoyable conference, as well as to the students, Stephanie Horsley and Daniela Bute for their generous and able assistance.

9. Discussion re Future of the ISPME Website

9.1 Paul reported that the website continues to work well under the expertise of webmaster Ted Love. A small honorarium can be given to Ted every year, but there is need for emergency back-up. Charlene asked whether conference information should be put on the ISPME home page or on a link of the hosting institution. She added that there many options but that it would be most efficient to post information and papers on the ISPME’s home page. Terry commented that Ted had certainly earned the $200.00 paid him by the Society and that maintaining the website seamlessly is crucial for ongoing communication. Estelle moved and Betty Ann seconded that Ted continue as webmaster, using the website’s home page with links, adding that this would be the most cost-effective way to proceed now that the website needs only minimum maintenance. The Executive Committee would ask Ted to provide a solution to the problem of necessary back-up.

The motion was passed.

10. Thanks to the Outgoing Members of the Executive Committee

10.1 Paul thanked the outgoing members of the EC, and added a special thank-you to Terry Gates for doing such an excellent job as Rapporteur in his thoughtful wrap-up at the closing banquet.

10.2 Charlene asked for written feedback on the conference, in particular regarding the newly initiated practices of featuring an outside keynote speaker, a Rapporteur, and the issues of time-slots, length of papers, etc.

11. Adjournment

11.1 The meeting was adjourned at 11:06 am.

Respectfully submitted, June 21, 2007

Deanne Bogdan, Immediate Past-Recording Secretary, ISPME

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Proposed Nominees for 2007-2009 ISPME Executive Committee

Co-Chairs: Heidi Weslerlund (Finland) & Randall Allsup (United States)

Program Chairs: Frederik Pio (Denmark) & Werner Jank (Germany)

Treasurer: Patrick Schmidt (United States)

Secretary: Elizabeth Gould (Canada)

New Executive to appointment Site Chair, Parliamentarian (if needed), Communications Director, Membership Secretary, and Webmaster

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////