April 2009 Annual Membership Meeting Questions

During the 2009 AAAE annual meeting in Philadelphia, we made time to meet as an association to talk. Facilitated by former member and management consultant John McCann, the session specifically explored the current membership criteria defined in AAAE’s bylaws. A short overview paper was distributed before the event. And this session was created to encourage feedback, support, concerns, and ideas related to AAAE membership criteria now, and into the future.

During the session, John asked participants to note their questions on index cards, and discuss at their tables which questions were most pressing before any member vote on changes to member criteria. As promised, we are posting ALL the questions provided during that session. In the coming weeks, the board will sort these questions, respond as we can, and make specific recommendations for membership changes for member vote.

Thanks to all who participated in Philadelphia. And if you weren’t with us, we hope you will read these and contribute your own questions online.

Inclusion/Partnership/International issues

• Why shouldn’t we be more inclusive and expand the membership of the association?
• Who are our allies?
• Who would like to share our responsibilities?
• What kinds of outreach does the Association have the capacity to do, to reach a potential broader membership?
• What value do we offer non-program based members?
• Is there a benefit of membership for programs that, at present, don’t offer an undergraduate or graduate degree, but are working towards that end?
• Does the term “arts administration” in the eligibility rules discourage people from joining – eg, for theatre managers, museum management programs, etc.?
• Are we better off expanding membership or making partnerships with existing associations like the Music Industry Educators, etc.?
• What can we do for the members [that] we might expand the boundaries to include?
• Is the AAAE membership satisfied with its current impact on arts administration educators outside of the college circuit?
• How to or if [we should] include field-based education or training programs, ie, Corcoran Gallery education program, Art Institute of Chicago, American Film Institute, etc.
• What is the primary motivation for the change? If it is to gain insight and input from professionals in the field, is membership the best mechanism? Would it be more effective to incorporate more programs?
• What should the relationship of AAAE be with its international counterparts?
• Are we an international organization because we have international members, or because it is part of our mission or values?
• Be more explicit about including programs/degrees from other countries.
• Who are some of the organizations/programs/individuals who should be affiliated with the organization?
• What are the benefits of membership and why would others (ie, arts service organizations) want to join?
• How many colleges and universities teach courses about arts admin or management outside of a degree-granting program? (ie, are there courses in arts admin housed in non-arts admin departments or as stand-alone classes?)
• As we strive for inclusion (international participants, for example), do we run the risk of trying to be “everything for everyone”? How do we focus without excluding?
• How can AAAE be more inclusive?
• How can we link to practitioners in the field beyond the borders of the US?
• How big or how little (focused) do we want the tent to be?
• Are we afraid to be taken over by others?

Standards questions

• What is the intersection of standards and membership?
• What are the implications of moving away from standards as a requirement to standards as a ‘core value’ for voting membership?
• Re: the standards, why are they now relegated to a “strong” suggestion for “developing” programs – certainly part of advocacy is promoting standards that represent a consensus of what is “best practices,” especially since the standards only apply to voting membership.

Mission questions

• How would we define “affinity for our mission”?
• What is our mission - How do we want to make a difference?
• To what extent, if any, would the new membership criteria change the current mission of AAAE?
• How does increasing Full membership help the association further its mission and/or level of service?
• What is the mission? What is the point? Who do/what do we serve? Why come together? I’ll understand who when I understand what.
• If opened to such a broader base, would AAAE’s identity be diffused?
• Who do we serve now? Who could we serve?
• Can AAAE be the advocate for the field?

Voting issues

• How would we reach out to potential non-voting membership and what would we offer them?
• Do the proposed changes for voting members – without any real history of students – make voting membership too easy?
• Are there voting issues for programs that are different than for individuals? If there are and you can define a voting program, then how would you define a voting individual?
• What is it about us that would case others to want to pay membership dues to join us, if (especially) they have no say in governance?
• Will national service organizations want to join AAAE if they are non-voting? Would they be more likely to join if they had voting status?
• Emerging or soon to be Arts Admin. Educators that under both models have no voting rights.

New/Emerging/Student questions

• How can younger, perhaps cutting edge administrators and new educators find a voice and a vote in AAAE? (We have been systematically ignored by AAAE through its current bylaws and membership structure).
• What can you do for the membership, especially for the new members or student member?
• Don’t we want to include emerging programs such as minors in arts management?
• Isn’t a minor a credential?
• Is the student perspective under consideration?

Misc. membership questions/comments

• What criteria could be proposed that would assure the membership that “comparable academic credential” would not dilute the identification of who we are?
• Would they be “members at large” or fully integrated into the membership? How would that be designated?
• Is a new structure necessary, or perhaps a better way of presenting the existing structure?
• Is the membership category issue separable from the issue of level of dues?
• Why must the focus of the membership criteria be on the credential itself? The field does not rely on specific certification/education, so why are the various kinds of programs the criteria for membership?
• What drives change, the association or the market?
• Does current stratification lead to creation of “cliques”?
• Why no time limit (# of years) for requirement to become members? This showed a commitment to the field.
• What is the fundamental difference between education and training?
• Given the homogenous nature of the AAAE membership – both in terms of arts focus, and the representation of programs and individuals – how will the board attend to the range of concerns members have, without resorting to ‘majority rules’?
• What would be the ramifications of moving from a “program” model to a “people” model? Are we adequately serving people, even within programs?

Misc. other questions/comments

• Where do we wish to see AAAE in 5-10 years?
• How do we raise the AAAE to a higher standard?
• Arts Management/Arts administration: define the field for AAAE.
• Can AAAE define some key research objectives for the field?
• Can we make the conference at least partially devoted to research findings, as most other academic associations do?
• How can AAAE define tenure expectations for the benefit of its members, addressing academic administration as its audience?
• What is the role of cultural theory/philosophy in our field?