Archives

Here we'll post summaries of past projects, surveys, etc. and meeting minutes, old announcements, old news.

 November 6 2009 announcement of election results (email from Dr. Wendy Hardman, UOIT):

For 2009/2010, you have elected: Trevor Holmes as Chair Michael Potter as Chair-Elect

In addition, you also approved the constitutional changes which create the Council of Ontario Educational Developers (COED) as detailed at http://ontarioedudevelopers.wikispaces.com/draftconstitution

See you on Novemer 27th at Ryerson.

Regards,

Wendy Elections Committee

Wendy Hardman PhD Faculty Development Officer University of Ontario Institute of Technology 2000 Simcoe Street N. Oshawa ON L1H 7L7

T. 905.721.8668 x2705 E. wendy.hardman@uoit.ca

 See the email exchanges from April 2008 (Neil Gold responds to our queries) February 2008 November 2007

 View the Survey Results from Winter 2008

 Read archived Agendas and Minutes Minutes ||  || Minutes ||  ||
 * November 14 2008 ||  || Agenda
 * November 27 2009 ||  || Agenda

 Read about the Atlantic regional experience and the Mission/Goals of other organisations, like EDC, STLHE

Read about our two possible governance models from October 2008 (we picked Model 1): Try these on for size: Model 1 is the basis for the draft constitution. Model 2 is just interesting. Feel free to reject either or both, or propose a blend or something completely different! Executive elected by any and all members with structure and terms such as:
 * Model 1:

Past Chair Chair Chair elect (three-year cycle; should be from different institutions. First time out, “Past Chair” could be one-year advisor from our senior ranks)

Plus various Vice-Chairs of Working Groups, depending on needs, and may or may not vote:
 * Communications
 * University curriculum group
 * College interests
 * eLearning liaison
 * TA liaison

Maybe also:
 * Larger schools
 * Smaller schools
 * Independent consultants

Pros:
 * continuity but also renewal is automatic through Past Chair / Chair / Chair Elect model (like POD).
 * Permits shifting priorities as we change or grow (or shrink!) through Vice-Chairs / Working Groups model

Cons: Institutional reps (one per institution, normally serving at least 3 years) form the governing structure, electing a Chair with a fixed term (renewable once – suggest 2 yrs with one renewal possible but norm should be to rotate every 2 years) from amongst themselves. All members still welcome to meetings. Decisions made by vote (one per institution; leader also votes probably, because each institution is entitled to a vote).
 * could working groups become too many at some point and water down our volunteer time/ volunteer pool? || Model 2:

Protocols: Every College and University recognized as degree and/or diploma granting in Ontario can field one rep (of any rank or title – but of course must be at least in part of his or her job an educational developer in that insitution). For items that affect all institutions, all can vote. For business items that are strictly College or strictly University-related, only the relevant cohort votes on such items.

Pros:
 * a collegial model that spreads decision-making around all sizes and geographies of institution.

Cons:
 * independents are left out;
 * what about institutions that have two teaching centres or more? (i.e. clinical or medical as well as main central, or some in a central and some in a writing centre) ||