Board members,
Option A
As per our discussion the other night,
Option B
I worked up this map as one proposal a couple of maps for how KABT regions might be redrawn. Notice that every region has a regents institution. and I think short of making Johnson county it’s own region maximizes the number of possible members in each region without compromising too much on the geography side of things. The map with Lyon county in the Northern region probably maximizes biology teachers per region. I can mark up other possibilities or suggestions others might have.
BW
2 responses so far ↓
1 bwelch // Feb 20, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Looking at the proposed 4 regions, I thought that the concept of 2 reps per region and more at-large reps would be a good idea. My only concern is that we have regional reps and then the “other” half of the board representation comes from the very active northeast corner of the state(Johnson county area). If this scenario plays out we would probably have good representation based on population – but we might be missing the boat on having an organization that represents ALL of the state biology teachers. What I am basing my comments on is simply the fact that the urban Wichita schools are not represented – that seems to be by their choice. When suburban schools get together their point of emphasis might be completely different than the problems and issues that are present in poor urban schools or poor rural isolated schools. I also realize our emphasis for any kind of change is geared toward getting ACTIVE participants. I like the possible changes – with the possible exception of WHERE the at-large reps would come from.
2 Todd Carter // Feb 25, 2008 at 12:26 pm
I like the changes and respect Bill’s concerns. The nominating committee should be able to address the proximity issue. I think activity should take precedent over proximity when it comes to the state organization.
You must log in to post a comment.