Charline Jao

Board Attendees: Koritha Mitchell, Alonzo Smith, Bernardino Hernandez, Claudia Stokes, Colton Hicks, Dory Nason, Jessica DeSpain, Jordan Von Cannon, Katherine Adams, Katie Walkiewicz, Kristin Allukian, Susie Lan Cassel, William-Claire Younts

Absent: Jennifer Tuttle, Elissa Zellinger 

1. Welcome and introductions 

2. Advisory Board chair election

Candidate: Claudia Stokes 

After a short statement about her vision for the advisory board (turning SSAWW into a more central organization, giving the advisory board a greater role, and ensuring democratic functioning), Claudia Stokes was unanimously elected as Advisory Board Chair.

3. Reports from VPs and graduate caucus representative (see materials document p. 1-9) 

Mollie Barnes (VP of Organizational Matters) opened the floor to discuss the conference timeline, her catch-up with Patrick Allen, and to invite early ideas about conference theme and cities.

  • We are working with firms – doesn’t cost anything for quotes, they get a kick-back for hotels (most things are negotiable)
  • Katherine: Possible to send list of previous conference themes?

Stephanie Palmer (VP of Membership and Finances) updated the board on finances, and the challenges of maintaining membership in non-conference years.

  • Koritha Mitchell raised the question of lifetime members and the question of bad actors.
    • Jordan: Memberships were raised after 2018, about 50% of conference attendees had lifetime memberships for a while.
    • Koritha suggests that lifetime members are more likely to donate. Seconded by Katherine Adams, who emphasizes reaching out to the generation of founders who will retire, and Kirstin Allukian, who says that a mini-campaign with promotional material early in the conference year would be strategic. 
    • Claudia: There is a clause to expel bad actors in the constitution

Nazera Wright (VP of Programming) shared her programming updates (see agenda), emphasizing that the programs and questions are prepared so different people can moderate and panelists can prepare. Theresa invites people to write to Nazera about specific panelists, recommendations, etc.

  • Koritha asks about the flow of the different programs, and what an ideal year looks like.
    • Nazera outlines a recurring timeline for events, (1 a summer, 2 a semester)
    • Mollie emphasizes the importance of robust virtual programming and community, especially while people are having trouble attending the conference.
    • Theresa explains the programs were conceived with special thought for the needs of scholars in grad school or early career and to balance emerging scholarship with foundational work
  • William-Claire Younts raises the possibility of a hybrid element. (Ex. Two scholars at the same or nearby university with similar projects, or having a host/home institution inviting people into the institution.) Would be happy to help with the logistics.
    • Kristin: Some members will organize their grad seminars to meet at the same time of a SSAWW virtual event, so we could suggest that to membership.
  • Katherine asks about different categories, and if it makes sense to ask membership which they would prioritize or would want to attend.
    • Nazera suggests the possibility of some programs during the conference. Describes program goals of meeting the needs of old and new scholarship, engagements with fields, etc. 
    • Katherine advises that rolling the schedule out gradually will give us opportunities for feedback. Koritha mentions people not responding to surveys, and advising against pauses for that. Theresa mentions her hesitation about an input survey, which might give us status quo answers instead of ones that push the envelope.
  • Mollie affirms that these programs meet concerns raised at a past author society meeting at SSAWW. Theresa describes using these programs as a place for outreach and making connections with other societies and organizations.

Charline Jao (VP of Communications): Gives update about social media and plan for newsletter.

  • Jordan mentions old newsletter run by Donna Campbell (example here)
  • “Live from the Archive” series suggestion

Colton Hicks (Graduate Student Caucus Representative) describes good attendance at panels and grad happy hour, and working with Elissa Zellinger. 

  • Something to think about: How can we engage students who aren’t in the dissertation phase yet?
  • ALA just established the grad student organization, so Colton will be the SSAWW liaison to that.

4. Discussion of organizational goals, needs and priorities (55 min.) 

a. Where should the society focus its efforts to best serve and support its members? 

b. What unmet needs or opportunities do you see among our members that the society could help address? 

c. Who is missing from our organization, and what can we do to better engage them? 

d. Looking ahead, what emerging needs should the society be prepared to address for its members? 

e. As you think about the future of SSAWW, what are your hopes and priorities for the organization? 

f. What questions, concerns or issues do you wish to raise for discussion at future meetings? 

Claudia: Wanting to raise the SSAWW profile (C19 as example). Standing panels at other conferences like MLA and C19 (SSAWW has them at SEA and ALA) 

  • Other mentions in discussion: ASA, MELUS, NAISA, WLA, AAAS, SSLA
  • Mollie on MLA: Author societies get guaranteed sessions by retaining “allied organization” status. We can think about pursuing allied status, or helping other societies pursue allied status (a lot of labor and bureaucracy, but allows boldness in topic).
  • Kirstin: The ALA panels that Kristin Jacobson organized received a lot of submissions (ended up being 3 panels of 4 people), so we can see a lot of opportunity and enthusiasm.

Stephanie: A focus on the public humanities, advocacy beyond the academy. 

Katie Walkiewicz: To unapologetically argue for the study of gender and sexuality, in an open and honest way that many can’t in academe. SSSAWW can be a haven for scholars. Raises the trickiness of “American.” Engaging with revitalization movements in California, done by California Native women. 

  • Stephanie amplifies Katie’s point about “Americanness.” 

Jordan: Visibility at other groups and other conferences. Where can we show up at other places? Emphasizes how SSAWW excels at mentorship and community.

  • Theresa brings up regional study groups (some thrived, while others have fallen off), and revitalizing them. 
  • Stephanie: We have funding to seed fund regional study groups and get them started again, would allow us to move beyond the north-east.
  • Colton echoes comments. Suggests social hours at other conferences to draw in grad students.

Nazera: incorporating something like C19’s seminars or lunch caucuses at lunch hour

  • Jordan: Great to draw people in with seminars and similar structures. SSAWW has done mentoring breakfast in the past and societies/author groups have organized things like seminars. 

Theresa: On discussions about the organization name, what are strategies to indicate the breadth of scholarly interests and pursuits? How can we signal inclusion? 

Alonzo: Continued support for graduate students, and creating more roles for them. A job materials and workshop event. 

  • Colton suggests the grad caucus hold an abstract writing workshop, leading up to the conference (2028). Mollie seconds, adding that there could be a guide on navigating conferences. Claudia seconds, adding a followup on crafting conference papers could be useful.
  • Event could be near the CFP release, around fall of 2027.

Dory is situated in Canada. On conversations about international connections, she has associations she can foster there with the Indigenous literary community. Help for early-career folks, putting together materials for promotion and tenure. 

5. Defining a vision of the International Committee (see materials document p. 9 for a description of this standing committee) (15 min.) 

  • Tabled for further discussion at next meeting. Jordan says that the committee was only active in 2015-2017, and not formed really since. Bylaws specify it as a standing committee. 
  • Chance to think about the Americas and other parts of the world, and not just Europe. 
  • Soliciting interest or recommendations for people who could be in the committee. Send to Mollie. 
  • Katherine suggests Jean Lee Cole. 

6. Scheduling of future meetings

  • One in January, one in summer months each year, announced in advance 
  • Claudia will schedule and lead

7. Adjourn