Attendance:
Attending
- Katy Huff
- Raniere Silva
- Karin Lagesen
- Greg Wilson
- Matt Davis
- Adina Howe
- Jason Williams
- Jonah Duckles
- Maneesha Sane
Not attending:
- Aleksandra Pawlik
====================================
Greg is back in Toronto!
===================================================
- Greg:
- New-look website deployed
- Changes to workshop and lesson template ready (see below)
- Fall instructor check-out in motion
- Jason: No progress outside of assessment; perhaps these activities should be descoped if they are not priorities currently?
- Karin:
- Have a backlog of minutes, my apologies
- Raniere:
- Worked on the instructor training discussion and checkout session.
- Will try work on “Connecting with Learners After the Workshop” next week.
Adina: wants the yearly report things in by the end of this week.
Greg: Possibly ask Amy Brown to do some finishing work on this. Greg will put her in touch with Jonah, and take it from there.
Motion: Greg will ask Amy Brown if she has time to do editing and how much it would cost. If amount is below $200, go for it. Seconded. Passed.
- Finance
- Liaison: Jason Williams
- Update: No update - waiting on updated/complete numbers; have some updates to proposed Budget for Jonah
- Partner Relations / Development
- Liaison: Jason Williams
- Update:
- Assessment
- Liaison: Jason Williams
- Update: No update; We have about 300 pre-workshop surveys but only 10% of post-survey responses. We may need to remind and push (mentoring committee follow ups?)
- Mentorship
- Liaison: Raniere Silva
- Update: Will have some discussion next week about the plans for 2016.
- Lesson Organization and Development
- Liaison: Matt Davis
- Update: none
- Communication
- Liaison: Adina Chuang Howe
- Update:
Finance: getting regular reports from leah, we are on our internal schedule to getting what we need. Putting together a budget.
Assessment: is going as we hoped it would go. Need to push the post workshop surveys to get those in.
ACTION : Mentoring committee should discuss these post-workshop assessments... make sure folks are reminding their learners.
ACTION: Maneesha email all instructors who have websites up to ensure that they know about the surveys to remind them to get them out.
Mentorship: will discuss this year next week. Working on checkout procedure from instructor training.
Communications: see above.
========================================================
Lead: Jonah
Topic: Various organizational memberships need final approval by the SC:
Partners
- Letter of support from U Nebraska Omaha that would lead to a Partnership if funded.
Affiliates
Sponsors
Donors
Only one this week. This is concerning a letter of support. If funded, will do training summer of 2017 if this goes through.
Motion: approve letter of support. Seconded, passed.
Lead: Greg Wilson
Topic: When to deploy changes to templates?
New CSS for website has been deployed; corresponding changes to workshop template and lesson template are ready to merge. The latter will require some minor reformatting of lesson content (probably one full day’s work for all our lessons - mechanical but tedious). When’s a good time to do this? Want to wait ‘til after the current storm of PRs from instructor trainees.
Worked with David Jacquel over the weekend, and have made the lesson and workshop templates look like the website. We are now getting a wave of new instructors. Suggesting to push this off to late Feb. However, there will always be a time when somebody is doing this. Will have a cutoff, since people from the fall will have to be checked out by the end of Feb. Thus, do it after that.
Lead: Greg Wilson
Topic: Should we run in-person instructor training at UC Davis Feb 22-23 for people in California?
Greg will be at a conference in Mountain View Feb 19-21; could go up to UC Davis and run instructor training there Feb 22-23. Would make the most sense if people from LBL/UCB/elsewhere were able to attend as well - should we go ahead?
Greg will be on site anyway. Could get San Diego onboard, they wanted to get in last year, but did not get in. No cost except time. Greg paying flight, google accomodation.
Note: this is only for partners/affiliates, i.e. covering our committments for 2016.
Motion: permission to go ahead if Tracy/Titus is on board, provided Lawrence Berkeley Lab and University of California Berkeley (BIDS is the affiliate there)? are onboard. Passed.
Lead: Greg Wilson
Topic: Is #267 ready to circulate to the Advisory Board for comments?
See https://github.com/swcarpentry/board_pvt/pull/267 - ready to circulate for comments?
Motion: Approve sending this missive to the AC.
Katy: aside... when’s the AC meeting? We were working on an agenda with Neil, but I lost track. No date yet. Late Feb so far.
ACTION: Jonah will get on this again.
Motion: send missive to AC. Seconded. Passed.
Lead: Greg Wilson
Topic: Who do people think would make good instructor trainers?
Discussion about training Ariel Rokem as a trainer are proceeding; who else do the Steering Committee think we should consider?
Belinda Weaver, IT coordinator in Queensland?
Lex Nederbragt, UiO
Tiffany Timbers
Rayna Harris
James Heatherington
Bob Freeman
Nelle Varoquaux
Naupaka Zimmerman
Should be aware of insider choices leading to loss of diversity
Lead: Jason Williams
Topic: 2016 Committees
We created several committees aligned to the tasks we thought we would need to address in 2015. One year, we should now decide how that has gone, and provide recommendations for 2016 SC. I don’t know if there is a motion in here, but for each of the committees I was involved with, there was a charge that made it clear these were ad hoc/temporary. Now I hope we can slim things down, but perhaps there are activities that could still benefit from this or another level of organization.
Jason wants to open up discussion about the future committees. We should maybe approve new committees or drop old committees.
As a faculty there is small time for do stuffs and being on the Steering Committee vs Subcommittee. There is a value to have others people that could contribute. Should consider if we should include some of the committees, and/or mandates of the committees into the bylaws.
Let’s keep things as they are, and do a handover with the new SC.
Lead: Karin
Topic:
We need to start figuring out the terms under which instructor trainers can train people. Can we find some things that all agree on as starting points?
some preliminary thoughts from karin can be found here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1E2MQ28WJqEcOr21pSGO_bLGGjjq15y_uDK6jyoLJzlQ/edit
Never employ these people, but we could pay them per training that they do.
Greg would say that they should not get paid, most are ok either way. If paid, have some more control over them. Big thing though is that we expect them to do mentoring afterwards. That heightens the load, so we should consider that. IT could be a natural line for when people could be paid. Payment could also allow us to.
Institutions paying for training: should possibly avoid having institutions paying for trainers with money, but rather with an in-kind process. With the checkout process we have a way of ensuring that people don’t go overboard with training many people (have to check out a certain x of people that they have trained). If we have institutions who would like training without having them do workshops, we can get them to pay more.
Subcommittee for this:
ACTION: Karin send out email with a when is good on this.
- Jonah
- Greg
- Tracy
- Karin
- Raniere Silva.