On Monday 24 February 2003 08:26 am, Mike Cole wrote to all of us:
> My reading of the award is that is too broad to exclude anyone. Cyril Burt
> would probably be a viable candidate.
I agree. One possible course of action(s) is not to take the name of the
award away from its place in division C, but to change the extant "system"
(loosely speaking) in it's practice of making the award. This could involve
combinations of the following:
1) Actions to tighten up the description, to bring the awarding process closer
to its original intent. Writing a letter is included here. My instinct is
that key people in this action will be those who are affiliated with
Scribner's work, those who established the award, and those of us who draw
upon her work -- e.g. chsig. Within this course of action a possible
strategy is to delicately point out the need to improve the awarding process,
more closely coordinating the merits of Scribner's work with the merits of
the candidates. This alone is a change in the rules/object of the "system".
A short Bio of Scribner, including a list of publications, would facilitate
these actions.
2) We could also consider how chsig membership, i.e. those that draw upon
Scribner's work, can be represented in the award committee. This would
involve a change in the collective subject making the decisions.
3) CHSIG can make a yearly practice of collectively making a nomination for a
candidate. A collective nomination carries the weight of the SIG.
4) (Fill in the option!)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 01 2003 - 01:00:06 PST