🚀 go-pugleaf

To: Jim Stonge and his list, as well as AECT-L discussion on Conference Paper
Guidelines


I have served on several conference planning task forces, and heard the
opposing points of view on this discussion item. When at Nashville, I had one
presentation proposal which was clearly a New England professor, AECT regular
who offered a research paper. Topic was a continuation of previous year's
Washington DC program which was sponsored by the New England Educational
Media Association. As it was written and checked off as a research paper, I
forwarded it to the Research chair with caution that this had been presented
at previous year's conference.
    I had a total submitted proposal count of four for eight slots in the
program. Fortunately I was rooming with Jim Hayden who representing Division
of School Media Specialists and had over 80 proposals to fill his eight slots
for Nashville conference. Several I quickly snapped up to sponsor for NEEMA..
Don Smellie, Annette Lamb, Larry Johnson, Linda Wolcott, Don Descy, and
Blanche Woolls (AASL Pres elect) .. all well known to AECT membership, but
new presenters to the NEEMA membership. I in fact was challenged by the NEEMA
Board for my selection action as research was a major regional issue and
these presenters were speaking on issues viewed as other than "students
learning as impacted by educational technology and extension of the
traditional classroom techniques to new media". Internet and technology
planning in the k-12 arena was certainly a risky topic three years ago when
we sat to plan Nashville.
  Now if I tell you my Anaheim story you can see another side of the coin..
There was not one proposal submitted this year to NEEMA, with my work being
delegated to the Southern Regional Leadership representative and the DSMS
representative to fill the slots for NEEMA. I received my printouts from Lois
Fredlund, and I have only 3 proposals for Anaheim.. Not a research studded
effort, especially since I was openly offering to divisions and planning
committee members my NEEMA involvement at Nashville as they wrote for the
Anaheim conference. The program application submission sheet clearly stated
two proposals per presenter. In past years we sought to showcase the best of
our leadership and presenters by looking for the secondary presenter on the
proposal... Or stating that the AECT member who had followed the written
request might have been restricted to the two presentation proposal.
   Are there not opportunities at NECC, at ASCD, at principal and
superintendent conferences in state and regional  levels, even in
International Reading Assoc and Math and Science Associations or Curriculum
Reform conferences each year? We must consider submitting these presenters
beyond our own membership to our state affiliates and Affiliated Organization
Conferences. AECT members do wish to present nationally and in reality must
present for promotion. But AECT is only one opportunity per year, not
including the summer leadership. We as an organization need to share the
expertise to the Affiliated Organizations Council and others: Indianapolis
Conference of the American Association of School Librarians in Nov 1994, and
their Portland conference in 1996. As one major partner in educational
learning resources has a vision of educational reform and change mirroring
our own restructuring (Vision 2000) our initiatives and planning require we
look far into the future. Our action plans in this arena need to be stated
and evaluated. There is the continuing perception by state affiliate leaders
that we are moving slowly from the overhead and 16 mm projectors and VCRs to
multimedia computers as the new technology tool which AECT now is adopting.
Research in Education is our strength and validation for educational
leadership direction. The legislation being formulated in HR.6 and S.1513 are
centering on Technology Research implementation and not traditional library
resources.. much to the consternation of the library colleagues with whom we
associate. At all levels of education, in all our diverse divisions and
organizations, AECT conference proposals offer us the opportunity to speak to
our own membership, but are we also presenting to the other professional
conferences representative in Internet listservs beyond AECT-L.
    If this thread of discussion is not viewed as important as the original
Vision restructure discussions which Rusty has initiated, AECT programs may
suffer and our membership will pass this decade looking back. As one "soon to
be voting" member of the AECT Board, I hope those who need to present for
promotion ask where else they can share the AECT message to strengthen our
impact for future generations of children using technology in instruction..
 or we will be an aging group not bringing the younger leaders along with our
enthusiasm.


Charles White, Affiliated Organizations Rep elect to the Board
Ct State Dept Education,  (Prof Involvement required at national level)
Long time conference attendee of several organizations and state affiliates