2004
Middle Atlantic Archaeological Conference
Minutes of the
3/13/04 Business Meeting at the Atlantic Sands Hotel
Rehoboth Beach,
Delaware
Approximately 35
people in attendance
The meeting came to order at 7:09 PM and President Mike
Barber welcomed the audience.
OLD BUSINESS
President’s Report: President Barber, in remarking upon how well
MAAC works, given its voluntary basis and the issues involved with holding its
conference and developing the meeting’s program each year, thanked the
organization’s officers and program and arrangement chairs for their active
roles and assistance. Pres. Barber
also thanked Roger Moeller for his continued role in producing MAAC’s journal.
President-Elect’s Report:
Cara Blume noted that she has obtained nominees for the positions of
President-Elect and Secretary, as Doug Sanford is stepping down from the latter
office.
Secretary’s Report: Secretary Doug Sanford, after noting the
availability of the minutes from the 2003 meeting, did not have a formal report
to present. Wayne Clark made the
motion that the 2003 minutes be approved, with Faye Stocum seconding the motion.
A voice vote from the floor approved the minutes.
[return to top]
Treasurer’s Report (see attached document):
Carol Ebright, absent from this meeting, already had submitted the
Treasurer’s Report to the Executive Board, with Pres. Barber noting that
copies are available at this meeting. Carol’s
report, as summarized by Pres. Barber, centered on MAAC’s available funds
having decreased from $18,644.14 (July 2003) to $10,268.77 (as of March 2004),
although the latter amount does not reflect the income from this year’s
conference and new registrants and members.
It’s expected that the treasury will return to about $18,000.
Treas. Ebright previously had
communicated her concern as to the production costs of the conference’s
printed program, $1,503, which is substantially higher (about $1,000 more) than
last year. She reinforced the need
for institutional support for the program’s printing and mailing, such as
through the program chair. In
response, Pres. Barber noted that the Executive Board had raised the
possibility, but not the necessity of increasing the registration fee for the
conference, including by using past costs to estimate future conference costs
and hence, appropriate registration fees. Pres.
Barber then asked for any comments. Wayne
Clark commented that this year’s conference has 174 people who have
pre-registered. Their conference
fees, along with the $1,000 in this year’s memberships and $400-500 in
memberships at the conference, as noted by Faye Stocum, should bring in about
$7,000 in revenue. Pres. Barber
closed the discussion by noting that MAAC seems in good shape financially.
Roger Moeller seconded the motion
to accept the Treasurer’s Report. This
motion was passed by voice vote from the floor.
Member-at-Large Report: Dave Mudge was not present
and no report was submitted.
[return to top]
Membership Secretary’s Report (see attached document):
Faye Stocum noted that at present, one Executive Board member and eight paper
presenters had yet to pay for memberships. Furthermore,
by the time of preliminary program’s dissemination in January 2004, 28
presenters did not have MAAC membership, with enforcement of this policy by
session and program chairs considered a problem as well.
Given the greater than normal difficulty with having all presenters be
MAAC members and the time and effort spent on this issue, she recommended to the
Executive Board that MAAC either abandon this requirement of speakers or move to
stronger enforcement of the policy. In
this regard she commented on how, this year, she needed considerable help from
Program Chair Bernard Means and Pres. Barber.
For MAAC memberships as of 2003,
this total had increased from 187 at last year’s meeting to a total of 236 as
of December 2003. Faye commented
that memberships in the last year had produced a profit of $610, as MAAC had
gained several individual memberships, while losing about eight institutional
members. Faye noted that this is the
first year since 1999 that MAAC has exceeded the minimum of 205 that ensures
coverage of the journal’s production costs.
As of now there are about 140 MAAC members for 2004, down 47 from last
year’s total at this time. She
projects that memberships will reach or slightly exceed the minimum number for
covering the journal’s printing costs.
Faye closed her report by noting
that currently there are a total of 360 names on MAAC’s membership roster.
She keeps people’s names on the roster for two years and if membership
is not renewed after that period, then she drops the individuals from the
roster. In the past year she dropped
21 people.
Pres. Barber returned discussion
to the issue of enforcement and Faye’s recommendation as to the membership
policy. He mentioned that the issue
was discussed at today’s Executive Board meeting with the consensus that
enforcement of the policy falls to the session chairs.
He further stated that if the presenter had not established membership by
the time the preliminary program is issued, then the presenter should be dropped
from the program. Pres. Barber asked
for discussion of the issue and Faye Stocum mentioned the problem of speakers
who did not have specific session chairs, such as for the general sessions.
Bernard Means replied that if such a policy had been followed this year,
we would have lost several presenters, resulting in a considerably smaller
program. Despite the difficulty
involved, Bernard prefers hounding people as compared to losing speakers, not
having concurrent sessions, and ultimately, losing attendance.
Howard MacCord reiterated the need
for the enforcement policy, one used by other societies.
Bernard Means suggested that MAAC could charge an extra fee if the
presenter was not a member by the time of the conference.
Cara Blume added that we could preclude non-member presenters from
speaking at MAAC the following year, a practice used in the past.
MacCord added that MAAC’s dues are quite reasonable and support a good
publication.
Wayne Clark made the motion that
MAAC keep to the current system and put emphasis on the session chairs’
enforcement of the membership policy for speakers.
Faye Stocum alternatively suggested that session chairs would pay the
full amount for presenters. This
motion was not accepted by the membership present.
Bernard Means seconded Clark’s original motion.
Pres. Barber remarked this motion seems appropriate and that like others,
he prefers having a full program as compared to losing several papers.
A member suggested that session
chairs could issue session participants a personal letter emphasizing the need
for membership payment. Another
member suggested MAAC could establish a paper presenter fee for speakers who
wouldn’t have to join MAAC. Faye
Stocum responded that she doubted whether people would pay this fee, if
they’re not willing to join MAAC, and noted that such an arrangement would
further complicate the existing system. The
same member asked about the practice for having papers submitted in advance of
the conference, but Cara Blume clarified that only abstracts were submitted.
Cara further noted that instructions to presenters are explicit about
membership and registration fees being required when abstracts are submitted.
The member further commented that she found the separate payments and
mailing directions for membership and registration confusing, whereas Blume
responded that MAAC was not set up financially to process co-payments.
Among further comments on this
issue, Bernard Means noted that giving a conference paper is a privilege of
membership. Howard MacCord
reinforced the need to have paid members as presenter in order to support the
publication of papers in MAAC’s journal, whereas the only past exceptions for
the membership requirement have been for specially invited speakers.
Dennis Pogue summarized the troublesome, yearly nature of the non-paying
issue, but emphasized the greater value of having a full program and reinforced
Clark’s motion and Means’ earlier statement about not wanting to lose
presenters. Pres. Barber considered
the discussion to have ended and asked Clark to repeat his earlier motion, which
was approved by voice vote.
Finally, Pres. Barber noted that
Faye Stocum had raised the issue of having an extra $5.00 fee for non-U.S.
(foreign) members because of the greater postage costs, a problem conveyed to
her from journal editor Moeller. This
fee has been charged in the past on an ad hoc basis, so Faye asked that
the practice be approved by MAAC as a whole.
Cara Blume made a motion to this effect, which was seconded by Moeller
and approved by voice vote.
[return to top]
Journal Editor’s Report: Roger Moeller first
commented on the fact that the journal has been in print for 20 years.
He asked for continued submissions, including thematic ones, and then
added that after Jay Custer’s resignation, Sidney Marshall is now in charge of
the peer review process. Roger
described the practices for both an informal and a formal peer review process.
The former involves sending out a paper for commentary to a few
colleagues for feedback. If an
author prefers, a formal blind (anonymous peer) review process can be conducted,
typically taking six months to one-and-a-half years.
With regard to membership and back issues of the journal, Roger stated
that the journal largely sells to members and that as of late, back issue sales
are almost nil (amounting to two, for instance, at this meeting so far).
Consequently he anticipates moving the journal’s production run closer
to the membership count and having increasingly fewer back issues.
Mike Madden, who takes back issues to various conference venues, has sold
a few other copies. Pres. Barber
asked Roger to comment on the journal currently in production, with Roger
replying that it has about 80 pages so far, with the anticipated final version
containing about 100 pages and book reviews.
Howard MacCord commended Roger on his continuing editorship and guidance
of the journal, with this statement affirmed by a round of applause from the
audience.
[return to top]
Web Master’s Report: Alice Guerrant asked the
officers and members to consider the possibility of moving to a web-based
registration for the conference, which would require credit card use and a small
fee for non-profit groups. The
membership did not respond in clear fashion, so Alice stated she would look into
the costs and web-security issues of moving to such a system.
Roger Moeller added that MAAC could look into the possibility of the
“Pay Pal” system that is used by other organizations and E-Bay.
Bernard Means commended Alice for putting the conference information
promptly onto MAAC’s website and indicated that probably 80% of the people
involved with and/or attending the conference obtained necessary information via
that source. Josh Duncan suggested
we could have saved some money by not printing and mailing the preliminary
program, instead posting it only on the website.
Bernard disagreed with this statement, citing the need to promote
interest and participation by the direct mailing of the preliminary program.
[return to top]
Committee Reports:
Awards Committee: Liz Crowell reported that this committee needs
another member, since there are only two at present.
An audience member asked for background on the committee’s activities
for those new to the organization. Liz
responded by clarifying the usual categories (lifetime achievement and special
achievement) and referred to similar information available on MAAC’s website,
with nominations coming from any MAAC member.
Pres. Barber asked for any volunteers for this committee and Howard
MacCord agreed to serve in this capacity.
Money-Spending Committee: Carole Nash reported that the committee
had not spent money as of late, noting last year’s decision to limit further
spending, although there are good ideas for distributing funds. Pres.
Barber then mentioned the issue of last year’s donation of $2,500 to Catholic
University for the Bill Gardner memorial fund.
He further noted that he had received a letter from Catholic University
in response. He then stated his past
recommendation that Catholic University use the funds to either assist students
in archaeology or obtain visiting lecturers in archaeology.
Carole replied that she has not heard of any activity to date on this
matter.
[return to top]
Student Competition Committee:
Josh Duncan, co-chair, reported that for information purposes, the
“student” category included both current and recent students, and both
undergraduate and graduate students. He
added that the committee still has problems with how best to compare
undergraduate and graduate performances within this broad spectrum for awards
purposes. Josh asked the membership
for more feedback on this issue and stated that the committee is seeking more
structure for the process and would like more emphasis and formality
(recognition) placed on the student paper awards.
He noted that this year there is a $100 award for best paper and that
MAAC should consider a more regular process and budget for the competition.
He thanked the judges and mentors for their participation in the process.
Bernard Means commented that the process should be referred to as a paper
contest rather than just a session and, he preferred this year’s practice of
mixing in the student papers with other sessions.
[In the past students participated in one session.]
A number of members in the audience commented on the good qualities of
the student papers in general. Pres.
Barber returned the discussion to Josh’s point about judging undergraduates in
comparison with Ph.D. candidates, including considering the possibility of
separate undergraduate and graduate awards.
Josh responded that the number of students in each category can vary
significantly. He also commented
that he would like to see more involvement of CRM staff in the future, and asked
for further support on this issue.
Cara Blume made the motion that MAAC should have one student award at the
undergraduate level and one at the graduate level, with this motion seconded by
Bernard Means. Sidney Marshall added
that MAAC didn’t have to give an award for one of these categories if there
were a limited number of papers, presenters.
Carole Nash further commented that in the past, the emphasis was on the
mentoring rather than on the award. Heather
Wholley further stressed this point, as did other members in the audience,
including the possibility of not having an award.
This point also was related to CRM employees receiving mentorship beyond
the immediate work environment. Pres.
Barber responded that students would receive MAAC membership as an “award”
for participation in the contest. Josh
Duncan replied that the committee has not had problems in obtaining mentors for
the students, and that he plans to have students meet with Roger Moeller with
respect to publishing their papers in the journal, or at least the student
winning the award.
Bernard Means commented that the students’ abstracts were pretty good
in comparison with those submitted by professionals.
Dennis Pogue reinforced the point that we don’t want to place any
burdens that prevent students from presenting papers, including obtaining
mentors in advance. Sara Rivers
commented that some students, such as graduate students, may not need mentors,
perhaps because they’ve already presented papers at conferences.
Pogue asked rhetorically if having mentors was a “good thing” to do,
and the general audience responded favorably.
Cara Blume asked if the award served as an incentive for students to give
papers. Josh Duncan replied that he
did not detect students were motivated by the award itself, but by the
competition and involvement. Bernard
reinforced this point by commenting that students did like receiving
recognition, such as an award, but looked forward to the participation as well.
Wayne Clark amended his original motion to reflect the point that the
student paper award does not have to be monetary and that it include receiving
MAAC membership. Doug Sanford asked
if the students had any reactions they’d like to share.
On their behalf Josh Duncan replied that the students commented favorably
on the mentoring, including by meeting new people and receiving feedback, and
the recognition. Bernard Means added
that it would be good for MAAC’s members and participating students to spread
the word about the student contest. Lisa
Young commented that a way to recognize students’ efforts would be to pay for
their expenses, including through optional registration fees.
Her statement brought up the issue that at present and in the past,
students have had to pay for membership in advance, as did other speakers.
After discussion the motion by Clark passed with a voice vote from the
floor. Pres. Barber encouraged the
committee to consider: (1) resolving
the issues of undergraduate versus graduate
status and of “recent” graduates; and, (2) further involvement of CRM firms
as to support, and involvement of their junior (“student”) staff, such as by
field technicians. Pres. Barber
indicated that MAAC’s president should contact CRM firms along these lines.
Bernard Means added that the student “session” should receive more
support from academic institutions as well.
Charles Cheek, speaking to the CRM issue, reinforced the need to consider
levels of participation by CRM employees, as to whether they are in a temporary
field technician, regular part-time, or full-time status.
His organization offers encouragement to their employees to participate
in conferences and he personally offered his services as a mentor.
Sidney Marshall added further
commentary on preferring the integration of students within regular paper
sessions, and that the student status could be designated in the program.
Bernard Means replied that the students’ names were listed in the front
of the conference program. Doug
Sanford asked if there were any guidelines for the student session on MAAC’s
website. Josh Duncan replied no, but
agreed there needed to be such, as both SEAC and CNEHA have posted such
guidelines, which were used as a rough guide for MAAC.
Finally, Bernard Means noted that professional members could add their
willingness to serve as mentors on their membership forms.
Pres. Barber closed the discussion by urging the committee to return with
recommendations regarding the previously mentioned considerations and issues.
Nominating Committee: Cara
Blume, President-Elect, presented the following slate of nominees for MAAC’s
officers: President-Elect, Carole Nash; Secretary, Liz Crowell; and, upon Pres.
Barber’s previous conversation with the current Treasurer, Carol Ebright has
agreed to return in that capacity. Cara
asked if there were any nominations from the floor.
Receiving none, Wayne Clark moved that the nominations be closed, a
motion seconded by Roger Moeller. The
motion and the slate of officers were approved with a voice vote from the floor.
[return to top]
Conference Report:
Arrangements Chairs: Prior
to his report, co-chair Ed Otter commented that the Executive Board had
considered returning to this location next year and would be asking the
membership to vote on this matter. He
stated MAAC could return on the weekend of March 12-13, 2005, but that we would
withhold action until receiving assurance that the restaurant and bar would be
open and that room rates would remain the same.
He further noted that MAAC may lose money this year on the conference
given the costs of printing the program and the food and tables supplied during
breaks. Finally, he mentioned that
he “cut it close” on estimating the number of attendees, but he could not
estimate the exact amount of the projected loss.
Co-chair Wayne Clark thanked all
those who helped with arrangements and registration.
He recommended that next year the Arrangement chairs have a set budget to
begin the process. Finally, Wayne
noted that currently there are 244 registrants for this year’s conference.
Pres. Barber thanked Otter and Clark for their work, who received a round
of applause from the audience.
Program Chairs: Bernard
Means reported on the full program for this year’s conference, noting that
there were problems with the receipt of fees and a minor number of delays in
abstracts’ submission. He
recommended that next year MAAC have institutional support and he further
suggested that we reconfigure the registration form.
He found some information on the form not worthwhile and noted problems
as to speakers coming with their own equipment or not responding as to equipment
needs during the abstract and registration process.
In response to Bernard’s
comments on problems with communications, Faye Stocum added that MAAC continues
to have difficulties with members’ e-mail addresses, estimating that about 25%
are not valid. Pres. Barber thanked
Bernard for his efforts, who received a round of applause from the audience.
[return to top]
Other Old Business:
Logo Status Report:
Bernard Means stated that the MAAC logo is now on the program and the
website, and that a color version exists as well.
Newsletter Report: Pres. Barber commented that he did not produce a
newsletter this year despite best intentions, but that he still plans to send
something out in the mid-to-late summer. Bernard
Means added that we could accomplish a newsletter-style report by e-mail and
post it on MAAC’s website. George
Tolley suggested that the newsletter information could go out with the first
call for conference papers via the program chair, a point with which Barber
agreed.
Change in Presidential Administration: With the completion of Old
Business, Pres. Barber stated that his two-year tenure had come to an end.
He thanked MAAC’s officers and membership for their support and stepped
down from office, receiving a round of applause from the audience.
At this point President-Elect Cara Blume assumed the “chair” and
became MAAC’s new president.
[return to top]
NEW BUSINESS
MAAC 2005 Conference: In discussing arrangements Ed Otter repeated
his earlier statement as to meeting March 12-13th at the current
hotel, which will be available with room rates the same as this year.
He considers the spaces offered as good and the rooms are of sufficient
quality. He reiterated his concern
over the lack of an advance budget if we do return, but still made the motion to
have MAAC return next year. Roger
Moeller seconded the motion. Bernard
Means asked when the SAA 2005 meeting will occur, and Pres. Blume replied that
it would be in late March, so there wouldn’t be an immediate conflict.
Discussion turned to members’ competing interests in these conferences
that often occur only a week or two apart, but opinion centered on the point
that most members don’t find this timing to be a major issue unless the
conferences are close geographically. The
motion was approved by voice vote and Otter agreed to handle arrangements.
Heather Wholley agreed to help with registration.
Pres. Blume asked for volunteers for the position of program chair(s).
No one agreed to serve in this capacity, so the position was not decided
at this time, but Pres. Blume stated that she hoped someone would come forward
and she had people in mind for this task and would speak with them before the
conference’s end.
Similarly, since Dave Mudge, the
current Member-at-Large, was not present and his status for continuing in this
role remains unknown hence, this officer position was not determined.
Pres. Blume will look into this situation, as the Member-at-Large is a
presidential appointment, but asked for expressions of interest by members.
Upon a question from the audience as to the Member-at-Large’s duties,
Secretary Doug Sanford responded that the position involved serving as an
officer by staying in touch and meeting with the Executive Board and playing a
role in addressing MAAC’s interests and issues of concern.
Former president Mike Barber commented that the position could be used to
fill in a “geographic gap” in the membership’s regional representation.
Pres. Blume noted the lack of officers from MAAC’s northern tier of
states, for instance.
[return to top]
Awards: Liz Crowell announced that the Awards
Committee had presentations and introduced Laura Galke to handle the Student
Competition award. Laura commented
on the generally high quality of the student papers, as all involved original
research and hard work, and the tight competition, including an initial tie vote
for first place. Using agreed upon
criteria for both paper content and presentation (appearance, clarity, eye
contact, staying within the time limit), the Student Competition Committee
decided that Molly Gleeson from Colonial Williamsburg was the winner.
Josh Duncan mentioned that Molly Gleeson had to leave because of a
visiting Iraqi delegation, but he accepted the award on her behalf and thanked
the judges involved, with the audience responding with a round of applause.
Liz Crowell then announced that MAAC’s lifetime achievement award was
presented to June Evans in recognition of her long-term and outstanding
contributions to MAAC, her legacy within the organization and to her students at
Millersville University. June’s
acceptance of the award brought a long round of applause from the audience.
Additional comments on June’s behalf were made by Sidney Marshall, who
underscored June’s positive relations with people in general, students, and
colleagues. June mentioned that she
was humbled and thrilled by the award. She
thanked MAAC and commented how she “grew up with MAAC” and that it included
some of her “dearest and best friends in archaeology.”
[return to top]
Announcements: Howard Wellman, conservator at the
Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory, speaking on behalf on the
presenters in the conservation session, stated that he appreciated those
participants’ support and the attendance of MAAC’s members.
He added that the group plans on returning to MAAC meetings and seeks
feedback from the membership on future sessions.
Finally, he indicated that the conservators plan to contribute to
MAAC’s newsletter, such as a “conservation corner.”
He asked if there were suggestions as to particular issues the
conservation session should consider. Lisa
Young, one of participating conservators, added that the group can offer
conservation advice for archaeologists in their papers and is willing to provide
free advice at their table in the book room, such as for archival materials and
new products, a point reinforced by Wellman.
Pres. Blume commented that the business meeting needed to come to a close
in order to have time for the ceremony honoring recently deceased member, Ron
Thomas. Finally, she added that she
will be seeking someone to take on the role of newsletter editor and to have a
newsletter of about four pages.
Mike Barber moved that the meeting be adjourned, with this motion seconded by
Roger Moeller. Upon an approving
voice vote from the audience, the meeting was adjourned at 8:37 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Douglas W. Sanford
Recording Secretary
[return to top]
