PV STEMNET MEETING

MAY 4, 2007

MINUTES

 

 

PRESENT: Judith Davis (Insurance Corporation of New England), Ann O’Neill (Executive Office of Transportation), Terri Howard (Holyoke Community College), Lynne Cimino (Valley Opportunity Council – Gear Up), Heather Lavigne (WGBY – TV), Peter Polito (Springfield College), Cecilia Buckley (Hampshire Education Collaborative), Helen Gibson (Holyoke Public Schools), Erline Provost (Springfield Public Schools), Zvi Rosen (PV STEMNET/BHE), X. Ran Duan (Holyoke Community College), Karl Martini (Western New England College), Richard Voltz (Baystate Health Systems), Marla Michel (University of Massachusetts/Research Liaison for Development, Bob Dickerman (Springfield Technical Community College), Donna Scanlon (Hampden Wilbraham Regional School District), Priscilla Miller (Westfield State College), Mort Sternheim (University of Massachusetts), Allan Feldman (University of Massachusetts), Sylvia Cuomo (University of Massachusetts), Kathy Baker (University of Massachusetts), Linda Sopp (American International College), Jack Borocas (American International College), and Jeff Hayden (Holyoke Community College) ), Leah Carver (Amherst-Pelham Regional School District),

 

UNABLE TO ATTEND: Janice Doppler (Gateway Regional School District), Patricia Crosby (Franklin-Hampshire REB), Charles Bohdi (Hampden County REB), Karen Hayes (University of Massachusetts/Research Liaison for Development), Wendy Kohler (Amherst-Pelham Regional School District)

 

 

The PV STEMNET meeting was called to order by Allan Feldman, Co-PI, on May 4, 2007, at 11:10 AM, in room 302 of the Kittredge Center, at Holyoke Community College.

 

Allan began the meeting by reviewing the Agenda and discussing the need to put together a structure for the Network – the Agenda included the eventual formation of a Steering Committee, an Advisory Board, and Next Steps. For those who were new to the Network, Allan explained how the Network was formed in 2004, summarized the PV STEMNET programs that were funded in 2005, explained the history and purpose of the Pipeline funding through the Board of Higher Education, identified who the Network Partners were, and summarized the other grants that the Network has received since 2005 -- (2 MMSP grants from the Massachusetts Department of Education), 2 CITI grants, and an NSF grant (STEMRAYS) with schools in Franklin County and Greenfield Community College. Allan also explained the new BHE grant and the timeline that was in place for this summer – 2 Bio Tech Summer camps with the Gateway Regional School District, one Mentoring program for teachers at Westfield State College, and Engineering is Elementary – a partnership between the Holyoke Public Schools and the Boston Museum of Science.

 

There also was a discussion of the current Network organization where Allan was left responsible for making operational decisions, and the need for a new organizational structure that would include – U Mass Amherst in an Administrative position, Project Management (the 2 co-PIs, and the Project Manager, the Steering Committee, the Advisory Board, and the Stakeholders. The purpose of this meeting was to develop this new organizational structure with a Steering Committee and Advisory Board and the need to keep the Network as democratic as possible. Allan talked about the original Advisory Board, which met, twice in the first year of funding. The Network as it exists has never taken a vote; all decisions have been made by consensus. The proposed Steering Committee would begin to define what the Network would look like, and it would begin developing a strategic plan for sustainability. In order to sustain the Network there needs to be an organizational structure in place that does more than reach the stakeholders via e-mail. The leadership needs to have more oversight. Zvi pointed out that the motivation for the Network needs to be more than going after new funding. The Network can provide capacity for a centralized organization. The Network can advocate for you, and at the heart of the Pipeline program should be the Network that represents the Stakeholders and that brings voice to local employment agencies.

 

The proposed Steering Committee would include 4 representatives of higher education (one would always be U Mass), 5 school districts representing the Pioneer Valley (one would always be the Springfield Public Schools), 2 regional education organizations, 2 business and employment organizations, and 1 public/community organization. Members on the Steering Committee would rotate annually.

 

Comments regarding the Steering Committee structure included –

 

  • Should we include parents as representatives?
  • Is there a PTA organization that could fill the role of parent?
  • Lots of partners are already in parenting roles.
  • Perhaps a parent might better serve on the Advisory Board.
  • Should there be teachers or teachers’ unions on the Steering Committee?
  • Are the Program Management personnel members of the Steering Committee ex officio?
  • It’s important that the person at the table represent the view of the area (i.e., rural communities).
  • We have always been a “committee of the whole” and we need a more formal structure.
  • What is the Steering Committee going to do?
  • What other sub groups might be formed? – these entities might be able to give more impetus to the Steering Committee.
  • Communication between the colleges is not as strong as it needs to be. (For example, the Cooperating Colleges of Springfield meet once a year.)

 

Allan reviewed some of the tasks that the Steering Committee would be responsible for –

 

  • Monitor and review the programs
  • Provide assistance to the educational programs when required
  • Adapt and modify program and educational projects as emergent issues force changes, ensuring that the scope is aligned with the BHE requirements and objectives of key stakeholder groups
  • Agree on regional priorities for STEM education and establish long term strategic plans
  • Accept and improve program deliverables
  • Grow the Network and look for additional funding opportunities
  • Others?

 

It was pointed out that in the past the Network did a needs assessment. In addition, the Steering Committee would work with the Project Manager to help with implementation – i.e., assistance with facilities, etc.

 

Additional questions/comments relative to the Steering Committee included –

 

  • Do all programs go through the Steering Committee?
  • All programs should be active – Steering Committee should review and evaluate program results.
  • Does every program come through the Network?
  • Steering Committee should be looking at gaining new programs for the Network; however, not every program needs to come through the Network.
  • Network should be a source of sharing information.
  • Steering Committee should identify new funding sources.
  • The Network does not have to be the fiscal agent when it supports other programs.
  • Steering Committee will help stakeholders to fit in.
  • Steering Committee should be task oriented.
  • Steering Committee should be responsible for making recommendations/decisions to/for the PV STEMNET partners.
  • Steering Committee should not make decisions, that should be the role of the Advisory Board.

 

In our new PV STEMNET grant, the contract requires us to develop a Strategic Plan that the stakeholders agree to.

 

It was pointed out by Terri Howard that this group currently meeting has been the Advisory Board, and they have an understanding of how the Network operates. These Advisory Board members have also been running programs since 2004.

 

Jeff Hayden added that he supports the 2 prong approach – Stakeholders and Advisory Board – they have a seamless interest.

 

Zvi indicated that the Advisory Board needs to be inclusive.

 

There appeared to be consensus in developing the Steering Committee membership.

 

Colleges in the 5 college area are not involved – how do we get them involved?

 

People on the Steering Committee would need to look for more business/industry connections.

 

Who determines the order of rotation for the colleges and the school districts?

 

Marla Michel pointed out that her office at U Mass helps to connect with business/industry. She did question what the role was that we wanted business and industry to play. What are you looking to get out of it? Marla also mentioned the Regional Technology Corporation as a way to access these connections.

 

It was stated that the group present needed to distinguish between the role of the Steering Committee and the role of the Advisory Board. We also needed to have it reflect inclusion and diversity so that it had a broader view.

 

Terri Howard suggested that we contact the REBs and the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission – it’s important that we know what they know before determining who fills these positions. It’s important to know if they are a good fit.

 

NEXT STEPS –

 

  • Convene a Steering Committee the beginning of June.
  • We need to determine the role of the members – you can volunteer or make suggestions to Kathy at kbaker918@aol.com
  •  We need to develop a plan to rotate the colleges.
  • Rotation is not a problem for K-12.

 

The meeting concluded at 1:10PM.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Kathleen Baker

Project Manager