http://www.kabt.org/Board/2008/02/13/for-your-consideration/ Kansas Association of Biology Teachers Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:49:16 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://www.kabt.org/Board/2008/02/13/for-your-consideration/comment-page-1/#comment-352 Todd Carter Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:26:33 +0000 http://www.kabt.org/Board/2008/02/13/for-your-consideration/#comment-352 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. 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.

]]> http://www.kabt.org/Board/2008/02/13/for-your-consideration/comment-page-1/#comment-351 bwelch Thu, 21 Feb 2008 03:12:37 +0000 http://www.kabt.org/Board/2008/02/13/for-your-consideration/#comment-351 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. 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.

]]>