AAPT.org - American Association of Physics Teachers

Executive Board Minutes - April 2001

April 6- 7, 2001
College Park, MD

Orientation for New Board Members:
From 1:00 – 4:00 PM in the AAPT Board Room of the American Center of Physics, John Hubisz, President, and Ruth Howes, Past President, led the orientation for new Board Members, Charlie Holbrow, Vice President; Mary Fehrs, At-Large Member; Mary Beth Monroe, Secretary; Frank Peterson, Vice Chair of Section Representatives; and Karl Mamola, Editor, The Physics Teacher (TPT).


Regular Meeting of the Executive Board

Board Members Present: John Hubisz, President; Chris Chiaverina, President-Elect; Charlie Holbrow, Vice-President; Ruth Howes, Past President; Mary Beth Monroe, Secretary; Alexander Dickison, Treasurer; Steve Iona (via phone conferencing), Chair, Section Representatives; Frank Peterson, Vice Chair of Section Representatives; Mary Fehrs, At-Large Member; Carolyn Haas, At-Large Member; Lila Adair, At-Large Member; Robert Romer, Editor, American Journal of Physics (AJP); Karl Mamola, Editor, The Physics Teacher (TPT); and Bernard Khoury, Executive Officer.

Guests Present: Warren Hein, Ann Johnson, Frank Curtis, Carol Heimpel, Sina Kniseley, and Maria Elena Khoury


1. Opening.
President Hubisz called the regular meeting of the Executive Board to order at 6:00 PM in the American Center for Physics, College Park, MD on April 6, 2001. All members and guests were welcomed.

2. Agenda Approval.
The distributed agenda was approved following the addition of Discussion Item E, Membership Dues (requested by C. Holbrow), and Discussion Item F, Korean Physical Society (requested by B. Khoury).

3. Approval of Minutes.
R. Howes made the motion
, seconded by C. Haas, to approve the minutes of the January 2001 Executive Board Meeting with no corrections. The motion passed unanimously.

4. Officer Reports.
J. Hubisz.
Hubisz announced that Information Items appearing on the Board Agenda are now posted in the Executive Area of the AAPT website in lieu of mailing these with the Board packet.

C. Chiaverina.
Chiaverina distributed a flyer prepared by C. Heimpel for the NSTA meeting to all Board members advertising the AAPT 2001 Summer Meeting to be held in Rochester, NY. The national office had received 320 abstracts by deadline time. Special highlights for the meeting include 49 workshops and 64 invited, contributed, poster and plenary sessions.

The three invited speakers are local to the Rochester area and address the optics theme developed for the summer meeting: Joseph Eberly, Rochester Theory Center for Optical Science and Engineering; Emil Wolf, Univ. of Rochester, Institute of Optics; and David Williams, Univ. of Rochester, Center for Visual Science. One special session also addressing the optics theme is a symposium on optics communication with speakers from Corning. Two memorial sessions have been scheduled, one for Arnold Arons and the second for Marsh White. The Program Chair is still working to identify the Dresden Lecturer for Sunday evening.

C. Holbrow.
C. Holbrow regretfully reported that he had not been able to present his toast of Bob Romer at the Middlebury meeting of the Northeast Section of APS/AAPT as planned. He was forced to turn back on the trip due to bad weather.

The Vice President reported that good groundwork has been laid for the 2002 Winter Meeting in Philadelphia. One of the three speakers confirmed for the meeting is Rush Holt, US Representative from New Jersey.

R. Howes.
Howes announced that the selection and confirmation of award winners recognized during the AAPT Summer meeting have been completed. She, as Chair of the AAPT Awards Committee, asked for nominations from the Board for the Richtmyer, Klopsteg, Millikan and Oersted Medalists.

M.B. Monroe.
Monroe reported the following electronic motions conducted since the January 2001 Board meeting:

1) On March 19, 2001 Khoury and Monroe moved that the Executive Board approve developing and presenting a session at the summer 2001 meeting in honor and in tribute to Arnold Arons. The motion passed unanimously.

2) On March 28, 2001 Khoury and Monroe moved that the AAPT Executive Board endorse an attached statement dealing with Congressional consideration of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This proposed endorsement was made upon the recommendation from Ron Edge, AAPT representative on the AIP Committee on Public Policy. The statement, endorsed by 12 other societies including APS and AAS, suggested three modifications to further strengthen the science, mathematics, engineering and technology components of “The Better Education for Students and Teachers Act” under consideration by the 107th Congress. The motion passed with nine Board members voting yes, one member voting a qualified yes and one member not voting.

Monroe reported that a letter of appointment had been mailed to Charles Robertson as Chair of the 2001 Committee for Professional Concerns

The Secretary reminded the President that he should appoint a Teller (past president) for the AAPT Fall elections. She also reminded the Board of the need to appoint a Chair and two members to the Nominating Committee who will prepare the slate of candidates for the Fall 2002 elections. Steve Iona reported that the Section Representatives had appointed Sandra Harpole and Karen Bouffard as members to this committee.

Following a short discussion among the Board members concerning the membership of this committee, Ruth Howes moved that the Executive Board authorize the President to make these three appointments to the 2002 Nominating Committee. C. Holbrow seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

The slate of candidates for the 2001 fall elections have been received from the 2001 Nominating Committee. These are:

Vice President: J.D. Garcia, Univ. of Arizona and Jim Nelson, Seminole County Public Schools
Treasurer: Charles E. Robertson, Univ. of Washington and Thomas L. O’Kuma, Lee College
At-Large Member (HS Representative): Deborah J. Rice, St. Louis, MO and Diana A. Hall, Nepean, ON, Canada

Monroe reported to the Board that John Layman and Dick Peterson have volunteered to prepare a revision of the Officers’ Handbook, including the definition of responsibilities and committee assignments for the newly created Board position, Vice Chair of the Section Representatives

A. Dickison.
The AAPT Treasurer referred the Board members to the one-page synopsis in the Board packet prepared by Warren Hein. The synopsis reflects that AAPT had a net revenue of $341,283 due to the general operations of AAPT. Some discussion followed concerning the accounting practice of subtracting the income from the Reserve Fund and designated funds so as to more clearly report the net operating revenue of the association.

Dickison reported that the January meeting was successful financially and we may have even made money. However, he advised AAPT officers to carefully keep track of future expenditures as their expenses (air fare and hotel rooms) for the January meeting were very high.

B. Khoury.
Khoury highlighted and updated some of the status reports concerning actions taken by the Executive Board during its January 2001 Winter Meeting. Two items receiving special attention from the Board addressed the New Faculty Workshop proposal and future joint meetings with the American Astronomical Society.

The Executive Officer reported that the New Faculty Workshop proposal is half in Fastlane and the other half is in transmission from Ken Krane. Howes commented that with the promised NSF review time of five months, the award date for funding leaves little time for the announcement and preparation for the next workshop scheduled for October 2001. In addition, this award to AAPT/APS might be threatened by some possible funding cuts, which the Foundation is facing. The proposed budget for the grant is five years at $140 K per year. The Executive Officer anticipates that the complete proposal will be submitted on Monday, April 9.

The Executive Officer reported that he would have another meeting with AAS at the end of the month in an effort to define a time for a future joint meeting. He asked the Board for guidance in this matter. The first meeting available to both AAS and AAPT is the Winter, 2007. The discussion among the Board members addressed four themes: (1) the establishment of a four or six year meeting cycle with AAS; (2) joint meetings between AAPT and societies other than AAS; (3) moving the AAPT Winter meeting to a time other than January, thus attracting the interest of other societies for joint meetings; and (4) the involvement of the Section Representatives in this discussion. It was generally agreed that Dr. Khoury will attempt to identify a future meeting date with AAS in the time period from 2005 to 2007 and will explore meetings with other societies such as the AAPM and the Organization of Black Physicists. In addition, F. Peterson will enlist the help of Section Representatives to poll their sections as to their reactions to these possibilities for future AAPT meetings. Final approval will come from the Council, which meets in Philadelphia.

As short information items, Dr. Khoury reported that he would be speaking in a session at Rochester organized by the Committee on Professional Concerns. He also stated that AAPT has the possibility of organizing five conferences over the next two years. While not all five will likely happen, the conversations are occurring. In response to a question regarding the workload on staff, the Executive Officer responded that AAPT at present could only do one conference per semester without additional staff being hired. Khoury also reported that AAPT will pay the expenses for Dick Reimann to attend the regular and tandem meetings of AAPT in Rochester in preparation for the 2002 Summer Meeting in Boise, ID.

5. ACP Bond Refunding.
Khoury recommends that the Executive Board approve the refinancing of the ACP tax-exempt bonds. The draft of the resolution was distributed to Board members and is very similar to the resolutions, which the AIP and APS Boards will consider. Khoury projects, given the current market fluctuations, that the refinancing of these bonds will realize a savings of approximately 1000-1500 dollars a month in rent for AAPT. He further explained that the only risk in this action is if we decide to cancel the sale of the bonds, AAPT would have to pay approximately 10% of the fees of the lawyers retained by ACP. The maturity rate for the ACP bonds will remain the same.

Peterson made the motion that the Executive Board accept the resolution to refinance the ACP Bonds, which was included in the Board packet. Fehrs seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.


(In a short ceremony following a session break, Khoury presented President John Hubisz with an engraved gavel and block. For her contributions during the preceding year as AAPT President, Ruth Howes was also presented with an engraved gavel and block.)


6. Assessing Member Needs.
The assessment of member needs is one of the five action areas identified in January by the Executive Board as addressing planning priorities for AAPT. Khoury reported that he had had several conversations with AIP staff who have experience and expertise in this area. Consequently, Roman Czujko and Raymond Chu of the AIP Statistical Research Center developed a proposed strategy for (1) evaluating the effectiveness of AAPT programs, (2) assessing the extent to which AAPT is meeting the needs of teachers, and (3) identifying specific groups of non-members whose information needs may overlap with AAPT activities.

The first stage of the two-stage study would be a traditional questionnaire focusing on the current programs and activities of AAPT. The AIP staff estimates that the costs for an on-line survey administered to a sampling of 300 in each of the core constituencies (high school, two-year college, undergraduate institutions and research institutions) in AAPT would be $7400. During stage two of the study, the survey would be administered to faculty in each of the four core constituencies but who are not current members of AAPT. The answers to these questions would assist AAPT in developing more effective marketing strategies for increasing its membership from each of these groups of faculty.

Fehrs made the motion that AAPT approve $7400 to fund the preparation of a survey assessing AAPT member needs by AIP. C. Haas seconded the motion. The vote on this motion was delayed overnight to allow Board members time to identify specific topics and questions, which should be addressed by the AIP survey. On Saturday morning, Hein collected the comments and topics from the Board and a vote of the motion on the floor was taken. The motion passed unanimously.

7. Report from Audit Committee.
Steve Iona, Chair of the Audit Committee, reported that the committee had reviewed the report of the independent auditors, Cohen, Rutherford, Blum + Knight, PC, and had found no irregularities. Khoury reported that the purpose of an audit is to validate the integrity of the financial reports and not to comment on how AAPT spends its money

The Audit Committee moved the acceptance of the audit and thanked the AAPT Finance Department for their work in the preparation of the report. The motion passed unanimously.

8. Physics for All.
Khoury recommended to the Executive Board that AAPT organize and host a conference addressing “physics first” as one action addressing the “Physics for All” planning priority. He reported that it is becoming more common for high school students to study physics in 9th grade, not exclusively their senior year, and there is more interest and activity in this arena than a few years ago. Haas commented that one roadblock to this initiative is the teachers…many teachers do not want to teach physics to 9th graders. On the other hand, Fehrs reported that the biology teachers in her area have expressed an interest to her about obtaining certificates to teach physics at this level. Holbrow commented that one consequence to “physics first” could be that 9th grade physics courses would drain the resources from the senior level physics courses as well as compete for the same students. The Board members were reminded that Active Physics, a curriculum product of AAPT, is certified for 9th grade. Khoury agreed to prepare an implementation proposal for Board consideration at their next meeting.

No action was taken.


(The Board recessed at 8:45 PM on Friday evening and reconvened at 8 AM on Saturday.)


9. Proposed Committee on Teacher Preparation.
M. B. Monroe reported that the members of the ad hoc committee of the Board (Monroe, Fehrs, Iona, and Hein) recommended the formation of an area committee on teacher preparation. The mission for the proposed committee was presented as follows:
“The Area Committee on Teacher Preparation will influence policy and activities within AAPT regarding the preparation of teachers in grades K-20.”

Six issues which the new AAPT committee could address include (1) the dissemination of “best practices” in physics teacher preparation for grades K-20 across our country; (2) the proposal of conferences, meeting sessions and sessions within conferences (e.g. Preparing Future Faculty, Department Chairs) regarding teacher preparation practices; (3) the facilitation of grant development for funding; (4) the identification of “best practices” in non-teacher preparation schools; (5) provision as a link between high-quality practicing mentor teachers with pre-service and novice teachers; and (6) the assistance in the development of standards and curriculum for physics teacher preparation and certification. The creation of the Area Committee complies with the Joint AIP/APS/AAPT Statement of Teacher Preparation.

Monroe reported that the Pre-High School Committee, in its annual meeting in San Diego, had expressed concern to her that the creation of an AAPT area committee on teacher preparation would usurp the goals of their committee. However, the members of the ad hoc committee believe teacher preparation is only one issue among others which the existing area committee should be addressing, and that the formation of this new area committee would unite the efforts and resources of the Pre-High School, High School, Undergraduate and Two-Year College Committees to this purpose.

The creation of this new area committee at this time appropriately enhances AAPT’s involvement with AIP and APS in the PhysTEC project. Board members agreed that the charge to the new area committee should go beyond that of PhysTEC and that the committee should endeavor to work with like educational committees in other professional societies.

By tradition, a proposed new area committee in AAPT is first appointed as a temporary committee. If the committee is able to establish a track record of progress on several issues and active, well-attended, meetings, the temporary committee can request the Executive Board for authorization as an AAPT Area Committee.

The Ad Hoc Committee moved the creation of a temporary Area Committee on Teacher Preparation and accepted a friendly amendment from Howes that the term of the committee be set at three years. The motion passed unanimously.

10. PER Dissemination.
Khoury reminded the members that the decision had been made to delay a long term commitment by AAPT to disseminate the Physics Education Research Supplement until the new editor of AJP has gained some experience with the journal.

Joe Redish reported to the Publications Committee that the publication has allowed the PER community to develop its own publication norms and protocols. Romer commented that no one is really happy about the piggyback status of PER but that it has worked out ok. It has a separate identity and this has been a good way to handle this duality. Peterson pointed out to the Board members that the new AAPT Mission statement holds the Association responsible for seeing that this community gets published.

One item for future discussion by the Board concerns the expense of maintaining the PER publication. Currently AAPT incurs about $30,000 a year out-of-pocket production costs but does not pay any editorial expenses. During this third year of publication, the association has obtained a $25,000 grant from the Spencer Foundation to continue support for the 2001 supplement. AAPT will most likely continue the supplement until 2002.

Dickison reminded the Board that the change in editorship of AJP will cost AAPT about $30,000 more a year as Amherst University had underwritten some of the publication costs while Romer was editor. The general agreement among the members was that PERS is an expensive endeavor and the Board should review how the publication fits into the strategic planning goals. Romer further advised the Board to give the new editor, Jan Tobochnik, about six months before asking him to make a recommendation regarding the supplement status of the PER publication.

No action was taken at this time.

11. Executive Session 1 (without the Executive Officer) and Executive Session II (with the Executive Officer) were held.

12. Task Force on Physics Content.
During its January 2001 meeting the AAPT Executive Board asked Richard Peterson to chair a task force of Board members (including Holbrow, Howes, Khoury and Mamola) that “would gather ideas and actions that further the identity of AAPT with contemporary issues in physics and communication of faculty led physics research”.

In a report to the Board, R. Peterson proposed the following charge: “The Task Force for Enhancing the Role of Physics (EROP) within the AAPT will bring to the Board proposed action steps to enhance the role and visibility of physics within the organization and its national meetings. While these actions will involve a long-term AAPT commitment, the work of EROP should be completed within one year. It is anticipated that proposals from EROP may impact the national meeting plans for 2002.”

A central idea emerging from the subsequent Board discussion was that future meetings of AAPT should possibly be thematic in nature, offering the participants a package of interrelated hot topic sessions, tutorials and workshops. The cover pages of the Announcer, publicity flyers and AAPT Updates could advertise the theme of the meeting as well as help sell the meeting to its readers. The suggestion was made to Holbrow that the Programs Committee might explore the possibility of defining a theme for the Winter Meeting in Philadelphia. Chiaverina pointed out that the 2001 meeting in Rochester has made progress toward this goal with special sessions focusing on optics.

Holbrow reflected that AAPT meetings should provide a way for plenary speakers to interact with the participants beyond their presentations. One possible opportunity could be the scheduling of special times for SPS students to spend with the speakers. Khoury added that the incorporation of physics content into AAPT meetings, while enriching the meeting for those AAPT members who already attend, might attract AAPT members who normally do not attend.

No action was taken.

13. Task Force on Physics Standards.
John Hubisz, Chair of the Task Force on Physics Standards, reported that the committee is still in the organizational stages. Currently forty-seven states have developed standards and AAPT is looking at the development of a service that will help teachers meet these standards. The task force will need to review these K-12 standards, determine how they can be tested and if the standards are being met.

No action was taken.

14. Web Services Task Force.
Khoury reported that he expects to shortly receive from AIP price quotes regarding the creation of a more elaborate TPT homepage as well as a database structure, which will become the backbone of TPT online. In addition, Khoury presented a proposal developed by AAPT staff to appoint a temporary Web Services Advisory Group, which will examine and evaluate AAPT’s current web options and services.

W. Hein explained that the proposed plan outlined the establishment of three subgroups, the chair of each sitting on the larger umbrella advisory group. (1) The TPT subgroup will be charged with developing a plan to bring TPT online in the next 12-18 months. The subgroup would also explore this electronic venue as a dynamic vehicle with videos, applets, etc. (2) The second subgroup will examine the PSRC contents and formats with respect to its mission of providing resources for physical science teachers in grades K-16. Subsequently the subgroup would recommend what should or should not be changed. (3) The third subgroup will look at the main AAPT web site to determine if it meets the needs of AAPT members and nonmembers. The subgroup will also recommend how to structure the site, making it easier for visitors to navigate. The membership for these three subgroups include AAPT staff as well as Executive Board members and AAPT members with the necessary expertise.

While most of the work can be accomplished by electronic communication, the Executive Office would like for each subgroup to have a face-to-face meeting prior to the Rochester meeting and a second meeting in Rochester. Therefore, the Executive Office requested funding for a proposed budget of approximately $12,000, which would allocate about $700 for travel expenses for each member. The groups will bring their final recommendations to the Executive Board during its October 2001 meeting.

R. Howes moved approval of the requested budget of $12 000 in travel expenses for the members of the Web Services Advisory Group and their subcommittees. C. Haas seconded the motion. In discussion of the motion, A. Dickison asked to be a member of the TPT subgroup. He also cautioned the Board to remember the financial implications of this action. The motion passed unanimously.

15. PTRA Proposal.
Khoury led Board discussion regarding the draft of the preliminary proposal to NSF/Teacher Enhancement due May 18, 2001, Funding the Next Phase of the PTRA Program. A new component for this phase contains a rural initiative, which will follow the urban model but provides for the creation of partnerships between rural high schools and colleges/universities. Participants would spend one or two week’s residency on a college campus during the summer. Both Haas and Iona noted two-year colleges would be a very significant resource for this initiative since universities are generally not located in the rural areas. Iona also commented that the phase of PTRA would, hopefully, improve the involvement of the college faculty in teacher training/preparation. Hein added that a possible goal for this proposal could be the establishment of regional centers for activities and the development of a long time infrastructure of teachers teaching teachers.

The estimated budget for this preliminary proposal is a little over $5M for five years. Since the due date for the submission of the preliminary proposal to NSF is May 18, the PTRA principal investigators are requesting approval of this prelim at this time. Adair made the motion that the Executive Board approve the PTRA preliminary proposal for submission to the National Science Foundation. Howes seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

16. Publications Appeal Process.
Bob Romer, Editor of the American Journal of Physics, proposed a change in the wording of the official AAPT appeals procedure. He explained that in the late 1980’s when he and Howard Voss wrote the guidelines for the appeals process it had been their intent to allow an appeal of little seriousness to be handled by the Chair of the Publications Committee (the AAPT Secretary) alone without the involvement of the other members of the committee. However, he now realizes that the wording of the current appeals procedure does not explicitly give the Chair that authority. Therefore Romer moved that the Executive Board modify the wording of the formal AAPT appeals procedure to give the Chair of the Publications Committee the authority to act on an appeal on behalf of the full Committee or to appoint a subcommittee of the Publications Committee (or a separate Review Committee) to advise the Publications Committee. K. Mamola seconded the motion.

Dickison expressed concern that approval of a change in wording and subsequent authority of the Chair of Publications could potentially cause some friction between the Editor and the Secretary. Khoury agreed with this expressed concern and stated that he felt the appeals process should go to a committee rather than to a single individual. He added that if at some point in the future, the Publications Committee starts to receive a large number of appeals, then the Board might want to reconsider this action. The motion did not pass (2 yes, 9 no).

17. National Task Force on Undergraduate Physics.
The main thrust of the National Task Force on Undergraduate Physics, a joint effort of the American Institute of Physics, the American Physical Society and the American Association of Physics Teachers, is the proposal being submitted by AAPT to the ExxonMobil Foundation. The proposal, entitled Strategic Programs for Innovations in Undergraduate Physics (SPIN-UP), requests funding for $128,000 for 18 months. The SPIN-UP activities during this time will (1) investigate and analyze the current state of undergraduate physics programs, (2) publicize the results of that analysis with the general science community, (3) develop a strategy for persuading physics departments to seek ways to improve their undergraduate programs, and (4) establish communications between the Task Force and similar groups in other disciplines.

The national task force is developing a second proposal for the development of a conference addressing New Directions for the Introductory Calculus-Based Physics Course. The goal of the conference will be to “introduce departments to the range of innovations in the introductory calculus-based physics course, and provide opportunities for dialog concerning how they can bring some of these innovations to their respective institutions.” The task force proposes to host the weekend meeting near the American Center for Physics in the Spring 2002 and anticipates a participation of about 250. The meeting will closely parallel a previous conference on Revitalizing Undergraduate Physics held in October 1998.

It is not clear to the Executive Board that enough ground work has been laid in preparation for the conference and is doubtful that the New Directions Conference will be ready for next year. If that is the case, then AAPT needs to begin now making plans for the Departmental Chairs Conference. AAPT would like to host either the undergraduate conference or the Chairs conference this coming year. Howes requests the Board’s indulgence in this matter until after the next meeting of the task force. At that time she will be able to learn of the specific plans of the national task force. She will also convey to this group the feelings of the AAPT Executive Board. Khoury stated that during the interim he would work with the AAPT Programs Department in preparing the logistics for the two meetings, independently of each other and thereby assure the readiness of the association to pursue either course of action.

As a point of information Howes also reported that the task force is discussing the possibility of hosting a small invitational conference of approximately twenty physics faculty from recognized universities such as Harvard and Stanford.

18. Improving Section-National Links.
Hubisz asked the Board members for suggestions leading to improved links between the national organization and the sections. The only formal connection between a section and the AAPT is the set of guidelines for forming a section. S. Kniseley also noted that Section Representatives are requested to file annual reports, in addition to the reports published in the Announcer, with the AAPT Secretary and Chair of the Section Representatives.

Fehrs commented that strong links are hard to establish due to the diversity among the forty-seven sections. Sections vary significantly in organizational structure, format of meetings and membership. An attempt a few years ago to obtain copies of the sections’ constitutions had been unsuccessful for the most part and some sections do not have clearly defined guidelines for membership. Hein also noted the lack of success in involving sections beyond the local level. He had attempted to organize a regional meeting while a teacher in South Dakota and had been unable to gain additional support from the neighboring sections.

Fehrs suggested that some financial support from the national AAPT for section activities might produce more involvement from the sections. Iona volunteered to poll the Section Reps concerning the creation of a $200 grant to support regional meetings of several Sections.

Hubisz thanked the Board for the discussion and stated that he would compile a letter to the Sections, which incorporated these ideas.

19. Center for Teaching Resources and Loren Winters Photo Package.
Hubisz reported that the Center for Physics Education did not come to fruition and he would like to revive the idea. The Center would be a site where people can come to do research. For example, David Wall wants to video expert demonstrators at work. Loren Winters also would like to put together a package of high-speed photos and the Center could be one venue for its distribution. Hubisz also suggested that the Center could possibly be folded into one segment of a digital library, not a bricks and mortar site as proposed by D. Hestenes and J. Jackson, but incorporating all their other ideas.

Board discussion switched to the status of the AAPT Physical Science Resource Center. Hein reported that the National Science Foundation is encouraging the development of a digital library across the sciences, which would have a virtual site or sites. Dickison commented that he had a concern addressing AAPT’s development of a digital library. If the association builds the effort on the PSRC how will AAPT maintain operation costs after the funding period is over? On the other hand, he feels it would be advisable to develop a comfortable arrangement with AIP and APS to jointly develop the virtual library. J. Hubisz also noted that talks with Jack Hehn, Fred Stein and Warren Hein were positive.

The Board members agreed that there should be more discussion addressing both topics and they will revisit these during the summer meeting in Rochester.

20. Membership Dues.
C. Holbrow recommended that the Board consider a slight increase in membership dues. The time is favorable as AAPT is not being driven by the budget to change the dues and a slight increase in dues now will help us avoid a large increase in dues at some future date. He expressed that the increase in dues will help the association realize a long-term goal to develop a financial reserve equal to one year of operating costs. S. Kniseley expressed concern that AAPT may be pricing itself out of a market as complaints have been received by AAPT concerning recent dues increases.

C. Holbrow made the motion, and C. Chiaverina seconded the motion, that AAPT increase its regular membership dues by $2. The motion passed (7 yes, 1 no and 3 abstain).

21. Korean Physical Society.
Khoury presented for Board consideration an Agreement for Reciprocal Membership Privileges between the American Association of Physics Teachers and the Korean Physical Society. This statement mirrors an agreement statement between the KPS and the American Physical Society. According to the agreement, the terms may be reviewed, renegotiated, renewed or terminated after three years if either KPS or AAPT so desires.

In response to questions raised by the Board, Khoury explained that the privilege alluding to the purchase of AAPT products by KPS members does not include the journals. A concern voiced among the Board members stated that since AAPT no longer charges abstract fees for contributed papers, this agreement could initiate a practice of publishing free abstracts for KPS members. Members could simply submit an abstract for publication in the Announcer and then not show up at the national AAPT meeting to present the paper. Khoury stated that the AAPT office would be alert to such a possibility and if they saw this happening, they would bring this to the attention of the Board.

Holbrow moved that the Executive Board accept the proposed Agreement for Reciprocal Membership Privileges between the American Association of Physics Teachers and the Korean Physical Society. Fehrs seconded the motion. The motion passed with 10 yes, 0 no and 1 abstain.

22. Executive Session III (without the Executive Officer) was held.

23. Adjournment.
President Hubisz adjourned the meeting at 4:45 PM on Saturday.


Mary Beth Monroe, AAPT Secretary