I think that is correct, however, meeting on-campus gives an opportunity to inspect the learning resource system, equipment, curriculum and facilities. Once a member asked to see the set of tests that were utilized to measure learning and I thought it was great to have that degree of involvement. Also you have to make sure you comply with accrediting requirements, some require that at least one yearly meeting is at the school. I just have both meetings on campus because I find them a lot more productive and shorter.
Elvira,
Please see my posted response to Joyce Kussad on this Forum as she had essentially the same posting as yours.
R. Roehrich
Elvira,
Wouldn't you share your statement of purpose and expectations before you accept your board members to serve on your board?
R. Roehrich
Syndia,
You're absolutely correct and the location is determined by how you best feel you can gain your board's attention and input. If a restaurant works, then use it to your advantage.
R. Roehrich
I will say that we can use both of them.
The first one should be on campus,to show thwm our facilities, to know personnel and environment.
Ohter depending on the agenda could be out.
But the most important thing to me is that statement of purpose and expectations are clearly define.
The chairman selection is very important, he/she will be the leader in achieving the effectiveness of the boards.
Perhaps to conduct the meetings at the college is a better idea. However, restaurants can work if the the meetings are conducted in a "private" area within the restaurant. There are some restaurants that have separate areas that are ideal for these types of meetings.
I tink that the bottom line is to identify a location that is central and convenient for everyone. What works for a board one year may not work for another one the following one.
Joyce,
Meeting in a restaurant, as you've noted, is not conducive to accomplishing an advisory agenda. In addition to the many distractions of table service, interruptions, cluttered tables, etc., it's difficult to get your members to concentrate on the real purpose of the meeting.
I would strongly suggest you hold meetings on campus, as referenced in the course, to focus your advisory board members on the task at hand and in an environment where their input will be put into action. This also provides you an opportunity to showcase your facility and get their reactions and suggestions regarding the physical plant.
How would you introduce this change to your advisory board and how would you structure an agenda for the first on-campus meeting? Finally, how will you gauge their reactions to the change?
R. Roehrich
