[CBW_Exec] CBW 2011 Proposal Rankings & question

[Ashley, Hannah]

Hello CBW reviewers (everyone else is getting this, too, but feel free to ignore):

So, based on people's rankings/responses, the following two items are clear; there is a question at #3 below.

1.  The following six got consistent strongest rankings and we should accept them:
Ianetta--DOE grant
Rigolino--EOP coalition
Hill--reading collaborative/physical plant/resistance
Bryant--student support/eng 100 stretch
Schreyer--adjunct faculty
Olsen--survey results

2. The following proposal got consistent bottom rankings and we should reject it:  
Stevens-Piazza

3.  Here is the question.  The following four proposals got middle or mixed rankings:

Sunderhaus
McLaughlin
Norris
Webb-Sunderhaus

Please let us know your thoughts on the following:
a.  Do we go for greater selectivity, with the idea being that we want to foster a sense that only the strongest proposals/work gets featured at our fabulous precon?  Or do we go for greatest inclusivity, to bring more people into the conversation?  Is there a middle ground, to do both?  (e.g, ask the four above for posters but not presentations, or something?)

b.  Do we want to define the conference theme tightly, and reject proposals if they don't fit?  As in, Norris's proposal, which several people have pointed out should go to BWe but perhaps does not belong in this year's precon?



Hannah Ashley, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of English, Composition & Rhetoric
Director, Writing Zones 12.5  (www.writingzones.net)
543 Main Hall, West Chester University
West Chester, PA 19383
610-436-2371

"For years I pulled my own existence out of emptiness. Then one swoop, one swing of the arm, that work is over."  Rumi
________________________________________